Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T21:44:11.011Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Borel reductibility theory for classes of countable structures

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

Harvey Friedman  and
Lee Stanley
Harvey Friedman
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 43210
Lee Stanley
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, Lehigh University, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania 18015
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We introduce a reducibility preordering between classes of countable structures, each class containing only structures of a given similarity type (which is allowed to vary from class to class). Though we sometimes work in a slightly larger context, we are principally concerned with the case where each class is an invariant Borel class (i.e. the class of all models, with underlying set = ω, of an Lω1ω sentence; from this point of view, the reducibility can be thought of as a (rather weak) sort of Lω1ω-interpretability notion). We prove a number of general results about this notion, but our main thrust is to situate various mathematically natural classes with respect to the preordering, most notably classes of algebraic structures such as groups and fields.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Symbolic Logic , Volume 54 , Issue 3 , September 1989 , pp. 894 - 914
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 1989

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

[1]Deligne, P., Milne, J. S., Ogus, A., and Shih, K-y., Hodge cycles, motives, and Shimura varieties, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 900, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1982.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[2]Feferman, S., Impredicativity of the existence of the largest divisible subgroup of an abelian p-group, Model theory and algebra: a memorial tribute to Abraham Robinson (Saracino, D. and Weispfenning, V. B., editors), Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 498, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1975, pp. 117–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[3]Friedman, H., On the necessary use of abstract set theory, Advances in Mathematics, vol. 41 (1981), pp. 209–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4]Fuchs, L., Infinite Abelian groups. Vols. 1, 2, Academic Press, New York, 1970, 1973.Google Scholar
[5]Harrison, J., Recursive pseudo-well-orderings, Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 131 (1968), pp. 526–543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[6]Kaplansky, I., Infinite Abelian groups, University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1954.Google Scholar
[7]Lang, S., Algebra, 2nd printing, Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts, 1967.Google Scholar
[8]Lang, S., Introduction to algebraic geometry, Interscience, New York, 1958.Google Scholar
[9]Lang, S., Diophantine geometry, Interscience, New York, 1962.Google Scholar
[10]Macintyre, A., On definable subsets of p-adic fields, this Journal, vol. 41 (1976), pp. 605–610.Google Scholar
[11]Mekler, A., Stability of nilpotent groups of class 2 and prime exponent, this Journal, vol. 46 (1981), pp. 781–788.Google Scholar
[12]Rubin, M., Theories of linear order, Israel Journal of Mathematics, vol. 17 (1974), pp. 392–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[13]Shapiro, D., Composites of algebraically closed fields (to appear).Google Scholar
[14]Stanley, L., Borel diagonalization and abstract set theory: recent results of Harvey Friedman, Harvey Friedman's research on the foundations of mathematics (Harrington, L. A.et al., editors), North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1985, pp. 11–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[15]Steel, J., On Vaught's conjecture, Cabal seminar 76–77 (Kechris, A. S.et al., editors), Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 689, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1978, pp. 193–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar