3
$\begingroup$

Below, by "structure" I mean "computable structure in a finite language with domain $\omega$," and by "sentence" I mean "finitary first-order sentence containing no instances of negation applied to non-atomic formulas."

Let $\mathcal{A}$ be a structure, $\varphi$ a sentence in the language of $\mathcal{A}$ with parameters (which are just natural numbers), $e\in\omega$, and $f\in \omega^\omega$. We define the relation $e$ realizes that $\mathcal{A}$ satisfies $\varphi$ with oracle $f$, or $\mathcal{A}\models_e^f\varphi$, as follows:

  • If $\varphi$ is atomic or negated atomic, then $\mathcal{A}\models_e^f\varphi$ iff $\mathcal{A}\models\varphi$ in the usual sense.

  • If $\varphi\equiv\psi\wedge\theta$ then $\mathcal{A}\models_e^f\varphi$ iff $e=\langle a,b\rangle$ with $\mathcal{A}\models_a^f\psi$ and $\mathcal{A}\models_b^f\theta$.

  • If $\varphi\equiv\psi_1\vee\psi_2$ then $\mathcal{A}\models_e^f\varphi$ iff $e=\langle i,b\rangle$ with $i\in\{1,2\}$ and $\mathcal{A}\models^f_b\psi_i$.

  • If $\varphi\equiv \exists x\psi(x)$ then $\mathcal{A}\models_e^f\varphi$ iff $e=\langle a,b\rangle$ with $\mathcal{A}\models_a^f\psi(b)$.

  • If $\varphi\equiv\forall x\psi(x)$ then $\mathcal{A}\models_e^f\varphi$ iff $e$ is an index for a partial Turing functional $\Phi_e$ such that $(i)$ $\Phi_e^f$ is total and $(ii)$ for each $a$ we have $\mathcal{A}\models^f_{\Phi_e^f(a)}\varphi(a)$.

I'll reserve "$\models$" for its usual (classical) meaning, and write "$\mathcal{A}\models_\star^f\varphi$" for "$\exists e(\mathcal{A}\models_e^f\varphi)$".

I'm interested in the following notion of relative complexity of structures: given structures $\mathcal{A},\mathcal{B}$ in possibily different languages, write $\mathcal{A}\le_{SK}\mathcal{B}$ iff there is a partial computable functional $\Theta$ and a partial computable function $p$ such that the following hold for every $e,f$:

  • If $\mathcal{A}\models\varphi$ then $p(\varphi)\downarrow$ and $\mathcal{B}\models p(\varphi)$.

  • If $\mathcal{A}\models\varphi$ and $\mathcal{B}\models_e^fp(\varphi)$ then $\mathcal{A}\models^f_{\Theta^f(e)}\varphi$.

Basically, $\mathcal{A}\le_{SK}\mathcal{B}$ means that oracle-effective truth in $\mathcal{A}$ can be computably reduced to oracle-effective truth in $\mathcal{B}$ uniformly in the oracle used. For example, $(\omega;<)$ is $\le_{SK}$-minimal since $\models$ and $\models_\star^\emptyset$ coincide for it; on the other hand, $(\omega;+,\times)$ is $\le_{SK}$-maximal since it can appropriately implement every computable structure.

I'm generally interested in the overall nature of the resulting degree structure $\mathfrak{SK}$, but to keep things concrete here are two test questions:

Question 1: Is $\mathfrak{SK}$ linear?

Question 2: Does $\mathfrak{SK}$ have finitely many classes?

I strongly suspect that the answer to each question is negative, but I don't see how to prove that. I'm also interested in the oracle-free version of the above, but I suspect that's trickier so I'm starting with the oracular version.

$\endgroup$
5
  • $\begingroup$ Is the symbol in the first line of the paragraph that starts with 'Basically' meant to be $\models$ instead of $\leq$? $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 17, 2023 at 0:16
  • $\begingroup$ @JamesHanson Indeed, fixed! $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 17, 2023 at 0:17
  • $\begingroup$ Also, is there a quantifier on $f$ in the definition of $\le_{SK}$? $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 17, 2023 at 0:17
  • $\begingroup$ @JamesHanson Clarified! $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 17, 2023 at 0:20
  • $\begingroup$ If you remove the second bullet point from the definition of $\le_{SK}$, is it just equivalent to many-one reduction of the theory of $\mathcal{A}$ to the theory of $\mathcal{B}$? I can't quite see whether this works given that $p$ is only partial. $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 17, 2023 at 0:25

0

You must log in to answer this question.

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.