Results 1 
6 of
6
A rigid cone in the truthtable degrees with jump
, 2004
"... Each automorphism of the truthtable degrees with order and jump is equal to the identity on a cone with base 0 (4). A degree structure is said to be rigid on a cone if each automorphism of the structure is equal to the identity on the set of degrees above a fixed degree. It is known [4] that the st ..."
Abstract

Cited by 1 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Each automorphism of the truthtable degrees with order and jump is equal to the identity on a cone with base 0 (4). A degree structure is said to be rigid on a cone if each automorphism of the structure is equal to the identity on the set of degrees above a fixed degree. It is known [4] that the structure of the Turing degrees with jump is rigid on a cone. This is shown by applying a jump inversion theorem and results on initial segments. In this paper it is shown using a weaker jump inversion theorem that also the structure of truthtable degrees with jump is rigid on a cone. For definitions relating to initial segments we refer to [13]. 1 Initial segment construction Lemma 1.1. Suppose for each e, g lies on a tree Te which is esplitting for some c for some tables with the properties of Proposition 4.9, in the sense of [5]. Then g is hyperimmunefree. Proof. For each e ∈ ω there exists e ∗ ∈ ω such that for all stages s and all oracles g, if {e ∗ } g s(x) ↓ then {e ∗ } g (x) = {e} g (x) and {e} g s(y) ↓ for all y ≤ x. If g lies on Te ∗ then it follows that {e}g is total and {e ∗ } T (σ) (x) ↓ for each σ of length x + 1. Hence {e} g = {e ∗ } g is dominated by the recursive function f(x) = max{{e} T (σ) (x) : σ  = x + 1}. Proposition 1.2. Let L be a Σ 0 4(y)presentable upper semilattice with least and greatest element. Then there exist t, i, g such that 1. t: ω → 2 is 0 ′ ′computable, 2. i is the characteristic function of a set I such that I ≤m y (3), 3. g ′ ′ (e) = t(i(0),..., i(e)) for all e ∈ ω, 4. [0, g] is isomorphic to L, and 5. g is hyperimmunefree 1 Proof. The proof in [5] must be modified to employ the lattice tables of Proposition
1 Introduction Degrees of Unsolvability
, 2006
"... Modern computability theory began with Turing [Turing, 1936], where he introduced ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Modern computability theory began with Turing [Turing, 1936], where he introduced
EMBEDDINGS INTO THE TURING DEGREES.
, 2007
"... The structure of the Turing degrees was introduced by Kleene and Post in 1954 [KP54]. Since then, its study has been central in the area of Computability Theory. One approach for analyzing the shape of this structure has been looking at the structures that can be ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
The structure of the Turing degrees was introduced by Kleene and Post in 1954 [KP54]. Since then, its study has been central in the area of Computability Theory. One approach for analyzing the shape of this structure has been looking at the structures that can be
Lattice initial segments of the hyperdegrees
, 2009
"... We affirm a conjecture of Sacks [1972] by showing that every countable distributive lattice is isomorphic to an initial segment of the hyperdegrees, Dh. In fact, we prove that every sublattice of any hyperarithmetic lattice (and so, in particular, every countable, locally finite lattice) is isomorph ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
We affirm a conjecture of Sacks [1972] by showing that every countable distributive lattice is isomorphic to an initial segment of the hyperdegrees, Dh. In fact, we prove that every sublattice of any hyperarithmetic lattice (and so, in particular, every countable, locally finite lattice) is isomorphic to an initial segment of Dh. Corollaries include the decidability of the two quantifier theory of Dh and the undecidability of its three quantifier theory. The key tool in the proof is a new lattice representation theorem that provides a notion of forcing for which we can prove a version of the fusion lemma in the hyperarithmetic setting and so the preservation of! CK 1. Somewhat surprisingly, the set theoretic analog of this forcing does not preserve!1. On the other hand, we construct countable lattices that are not isomorphic to any initial segment of Dh.