Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T11:48:43.105Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

An undecidable problem in finite combinatorics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

Kevin J. Compton*
Affiliation:
Wesleyan University, Middletown, Connecticut 06457

Extract

Problems of computing probabilities of statements about large, finite structures have become an important subject area of finite combinatorics. Within the last two decades many researchers have turned their attention to such problems and have developed a variety of methods for dealing with them. Applications of these ideas include nonconstructive existence proofs for graphs with certain properties by showing the properties occur with nonzero probabilities (for examples see Erdös and Spencer [ES] and Bollobás [Bo]), and determination of average running times for sorting algorithms by computing asymptotic probabilities of statements about permutations (see Knuth [Kn]). Two types of techniques recur in solutions to such problems: probabilistic techniques, such as those used by Erdös and Spencer [ES], and classical assymptotic techniques, such as those surveyed by Bender [Be] and de Bruijn [Br]. Studying this body of techniques, one notices that characteristics of these problems suggest certain methods of solution, in much the same way that the form of an integrand may suggest certain substitutions. The question arises, then, as to whether there is a systematic way to approach these problems: is there an algorithm for computing asymptotic probabilities? I will show that the answer is “no”—for any reasonable formulation, the problem of computing asymptotic probabilities is undecidable.

The main theorem of the paper is Theorem 1.6, which says that there is a finitely axiomatizable class in which every first order sentence has an asymptotic probability of 0 or 1—i.e., is almost always true or almost always false in finite structures—but for which the problem of deciding whether a sentence has asymptotic probability 0 or 1 is undecidable. Heretofore, classes known to have such a 0-1 law have had decidable asymptotic probability problems (see Lynch [Ly] for examples and a discussion of previous work in the area).

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 1984

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

[An]Andrews, G. E., Theory of partitions, Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts, 1976.Google Scholar
[BE]Bateman, P. and Erdös, P., Monotonicity of partition functions, Mathematika, vol. 3 (1956), pp. 114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[Be]Bender, E. A., Asymptotic methods in enumeration, SIAM Review, vol. 16 (1974), pp. 485515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[BG]Bender, E. A. and Goldman, J. R., Enumerative uses of generating functions, Indiana University Mathematics Journal, vol. 20 (1971), pp. 753765.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[Bo]Bollobás, B., Graph theory, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1979.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[Br]de Bruijn, N. G., Asymptotic methods in analysis, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1958.Google Scholar
[CK]Chang, C. C. and Keisler, H. J., Model theory, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1973.Google Scholar
[Co1]Compton, K., Applications of logic to finite combinatorics, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, May 1980.Google Scholar
[Co2]Compton, K., A logical approach to asymptotic combinatorics. II: Monadic second order properties, Advances in Mathematics (to appear).Google Scholar
[ES]Erdös, P. and Spencer, J., Probabilistic methods in combinatorics, Academic Press, New York, 1974.Google Scholar
[Fa1]Fagin, R., Probabilities on finite models, this Journal, vol. 41 (1976), pp. 5058.Google Scholar
[Fa2]Fagin, R., The number of finite relational structures. Discrete Mathematics, vol. 19 (1977), pp. 1721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[GKLT]Glebskiǐ, Yu. V., Kogan, D. I., M. I. Liogon′kiǐ, and Talanov, V. A., Range and degree of realizability of formulas in the restricted predicate calculus, Kibernetika (Kiev) 1969, no. 2, pp. 1728; English translation, Cybernetics, vol. 5 (1969), pp. 142–154 (1972).Google Scholar
[Gr]Grandjean, E., Complexity of the first order theory of almost all finite structures, Journal of Computer and System Sciences (to appear).Google Scholar
[Kn]Knuth, D., The art of computer programming. Vol. 3, Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts, 1973.Google Scholar
[Li]Liogon′kiǐ, M. I., On the question of quantitative characteristics of logical formulas, Kibernetika (Kiev) 1970, no. 3, pp. 1622; English translation, Cybernetics, vol. 6 (1970), pp. 205–211 (1973).Google Scholar
[Ly]Lynch, J., Almost sure theories, Annals of Mathematical Logic, vol. 18 (1980), pp. 91135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[Ro]Rogers, H., Theory of recursive functions and effective computability, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1967.Google Scholar
[Va]Vaught, R. L., On a theorem of Cobham concerning undecidable theories, Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science (Proceedings of the 1960 International Congress), Stanford University Press, Stanford, California, 1962, pp. 1925.Google Scholar