Results 1 
5 of
5
Lowness Properties and Randomness
 ADVANCES IN MATHEMATICS
"... The set A is low for MartinLof random if each random set is already random relative to A. A is Ktrivial if the prefix complexity K of each initial segment of A is minimal, namely K(n)+O(1). We show that these classes coincide. This implies answers to questions of AmbosSpies and Kucera [2 ..."
Abstract

Cited by 78 (21 self)
 Add to MetaCart
The set A is low for MartinLof random if each random set is already random relative to A. A is Ktrivial if the prefix complexity K of each initial segment of A is minimal, namely K(n)+O(1). We show that these classes coincide. This implies answers to questions of AmbosSpies and Kucera [2], showing that each low for MartinLof random set is # 2 . Our class induces a natural intermediate # 3 ideal in the r.e. Turing degrees (which generates the whole class under downward closure). Answering
Eliminating concepts
 Proceedings of the IMS workshop on computational prospects of infinity
, 2008
"... Four classes of sets have been introduced independently by various researchers: low for K, low for MLrandomness, basis for MLrandomness and Ktrivial. They are all equal. This survey serves as an introduction to these coincidence results, obtained in [24] and [10]. The focus is on providing backdo ..."
Abstract

Cited by 5 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Four classes of sets have been introduced independently by various researchers: low for K, low for MLrandomness, basis for MLrandomness and Ktrivial. They are all equal. This survey serves as an introduction to these coincidence results, obtained in [24] and [10]. The focus is on providing backdoor access to the proofs. 1. Outline of the results All sets will be subsets of N unless otherwise stated. K(x) denotes the prefix free complexity of a string x. A set A is Ktrivial if, within a constant, each initial segment of A has minimal prefix free complexity. That is, there is c ∈ N such that ∀n K(A ↾ n) ≤ K(0 n) + c. This class was introduced by Chaitin [5] and further studied by Solovay (unpublished). Note that the particular effective epresentation of a number n by a string (unary here) is irrelevant, since up to a constant K(n) is independent from the representation. A is low for MartinLöf randomness if each MartinLöf random set is already MartinLöf random relative to A. This class was defined in Zambella [28], and studied by Kučera and Terwijn [17]. In this survey we will see that the two classes are equivalent [24]. Further concepts have been introduced: to be a basis for MLrandomness (Kučera [16]), and to be low for K (Muchnik jr, in a seminar at Moscow State, 1999). They will also be eliminated, by showing equivalence with Ktriviality. All
Jump inversions inside effectively closed sets and applications to randomness
 J. Symbolic Logic
"... Abstract. We study inversions of the jump operator on Π0 1 classes, combined with certain basis theorems. These jump inversions have implications for the study of the jump operator on the random degrees—for various notions of randomness. For example, we characterize the jumps of the weakly 2random ..."
Abstract

Cited by 1 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. We study inversions of the jump operator on Π0 1 classes, combined with certain basis theorems. These jump inversions have implications for the study of the jump operator on the random degrees—for various notions of randomness. For example, we characterize the jumps of the weakly 2random sets which are not 2random, and the jumps of the weakly 1random relative to 0 ′ sets which are not 2random. Both of the classes coincide with the degrees above 0 ′ which are not 0 ′dominated. A further application is the complete solution of [Nie09, Problem 3.6.9]: one direction of van Lambalgen’s theorem holds for weak 2randomness, while the other fails. Finally we discuss various techniques for coding information into incomplete randoms. Using these techniques we give a negative answer to [Nie09, Problem 8.2.14]: not all weakly 2random sets are array computable. In fact, given any oracle X, there is a weakly 2random which is not array computable relative to X. This contrasts with the fact that all 2random sets are array computable. 1.
MEASURE AND CUPPING IN THE TURING DEGREES
, 2011
"... We answer a question of Jockusch by showing that the measure of the Turing degrees which satisfy the cupping property is 0. In fact, every 2random degree has a strong minimal cover, and so fails to satisfy the cupping property. ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
We answer a question of Jockusch by showing that the measure of the Turing degrees which satisfy the cupping property is 0. In fact, every 2random degree has a strong minimal cover, and so fails to satisfy the cupping property.
MARTIN’S AXIOM AND EMBEDDINGS OF UPPER SEMILATTICES INTO THE TURING DEGREES
"... Abstract. It is shown that every locally countable upper semilattice of cardinality continuum can be embedded into the Turing degrees, assuming Martin’s Axiom. 1. ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. It is shown that every locally countable upper semilattice of cardinality continuum can be embedded into the Turing degrees, assuming Martin’s Axiom. 1.