Results 1  10
of
37
Trivial Reals
"... Solovay showed that there are noncomputable reals ff such that H(ff _ n) 6 H(1n) + O(1), where H is prefixfree Kolmogorov complexity. Such Htrivial reals are interesting due to the connection between algorithmic complexity and effective randomness. We give a new, easier construction of an Htrivi ..."
Abstract

Cited by 56 (31 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Solovay showed that there are noncomputable reals ff such that H(ff _ n) 6 H(1n) + O(1), where H is prefixfree Kolmogorov complexity. Such Htrivial reals are interesting due to the connection between algorithmic complexity and effective randomness. We give a new, easier construction of an Htrivial real. We also analyze various computabilitytheoretic properties of the Htrivial reals, showing for example that no Htrivial real can compute the halting problem. Therefore, our construction of an Htrivial computably enumerable set is an easy, injuryfree construction of an incomplete computably enumerable set. Finally, we relate the Htrivials to other classes of "highly nonrandom " reals that have been previously studied.
Randomness, relativization, and Turing degrees
 J. Symbolic Logic
, 2005
"... We compare various notions of algorithmic randomness. First we consider relativized randomness. A set is nrandom if it is MartinLof random relative to . We show that a set is 2random if and only if there is a constant c such that infinitely many initial segments x of the set are cincompre ..."
Abstract

Cited by 38 (17 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We compare various notions of algorithmic randomness. First we consider relativized randomness. A set is nrandom if it is MartinLof random relative to . We show that a set is 2random if and only if there is a constant c such that infinitely many initial segments x of the set are cincompressible: C(x) c. The `only if' direction was obtained independently by Joseph Miller. This characterization can be extended to the case of timebounded Ccomplexity.
Recursively Enumerable Reals and Chaitin Ω Numbers
"... A real is called recursively enumerable if it is the limit of a recursive, increasing, converging sequence of rationals. Following Solovay [23] and Chaitin [10] we say that an r.e. real dominates an r.e. real if from a good approximation of from below one can compute a good approximation of from b ..."
Abstract

Cited by 34 (3 self)
 Add to MetaCart
A real is called recursively enumerable if it is the limit of a recursive, increasing, converging sequence of rationals. Following Solovay [23] and Chaitin [10] we say that an r.e. real dominates an r.e. real if from a good approximation of from below one can compute a good approximation of from below. We shall study this relation and characterize it in terms of relations between r.e. sets. Solovay's [23]like numbers are the maximal r.e. real numbers with respect to this order. They are random r.e. real numbers. The halting probability ofa universal selfdelimiting Turing machine (Chaitin's Ω number, [9]) is also a random r.e. real. Solovay showed that any Chaitin Ω number islike. In this paper we show that the converse implication is true as well: any Ωlike real in the unit interval is the halting probability of a universal selfdelimiting Turing machine.
Almost everywhere domination
 J. Symbolic Logic
"... ATuringdegreea is said to be almost everywhere dominating if, for almost all X ∈ 2 ω with respect to the “fair coin ” probability measure on 2 ω,andforallg: ω → ω Turing reducible to X, thereexistsf: ω → ω of Turing degree a which dominates g. We study the problem of characterizing the almost everyw ..."
Abstract

Cited by 33 (16 self)
 Add to MetaCart
ATuringdegreea is said to be almost everywhere dominating if, for almost all X ∈ 2 ω with respect to the “fair coin ” probability measure on 2 ω,andforallg: ω → ω Turing reducible to X, thereexistsf: ω → ω of Turing degree a which dominates g. We study the problem of characterizing the almost everywhere dominating Turing degrees and other, similarly defined classes of Turing degrees. We relate this problem to some questions in the reverse mathematics of measure theory. 1
Lowness for the Class of Random Sets
, 1998
"... A positive answer to a question of M. van Lambalgen and D. Zambella whether there exist nonrecursive sets that are low for the class of random sets is obtained. Here a set A is low for the class RAND of random sets if RAND = RAND A . 1 Introduction The present paper is concerned with the noti ..."
Abstract

Cited by 30 (3 self)
 Add to MetaCart
A positive answer to a question of M. van Lambalgen and D. Zambella whether there exist nonrecursive sets that are low for the class of random sets is obtained. Here a set A is low for the class RAND of random sets if RAND = RAND A . 1 Introduction The present paper is concerned with the notion of randomness as originally defined by P. MartinLof in [8]. A set is MartinLofrandom, or 1random for short, if it cannot be approximated in measure by recursive means. These sets have played a central role in the study of algorithmic randomness. One can relativize the definition of randomness to an arbitrary oracle. Relativized randomness has been studied by several authors. The intuitive meaning of "A is 1random relative to B" is that A is independent of B. A justification for this interpretation is given by M. van Lambalgen [7]. In this introduction we review some of the basic properties of sets which are 1random and we state the main problem. We work in the Cantor space 1 The fi...
Randomness in Computability Theory
, 2000
"... We discuss some aspects of algorithmic randomness and state some open problems in this area. The first part is devoted to the question "What is a computably random sequence?" Here we survey some of the approaches to algorithmic randomness and address some questions on these concepts. In the seco ..."
Abstract

Cited by 28 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We discuss some aspects of algorithmic randomness and state some open problems in this area. The first part is devoted to the question "What is a computably random sequence?" Here we survey some of the approaches to algorithmic randomness and address some questions on these concepts. In the second part we look at the Turing degrees of MartinLof random sets. Finally, in the third part we deal with relativized randomness. Here we look at oracles which do not change randomness. 1980 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 03D80; Secondary 03D28. 1 Introduction Formalizations of the intuitive notions of computability and randomness are among the major achievements in the foundations of mathematics in the 20th century. It is commonly accepted that various equivalent formal computability notions  like Turing computability or recursiveness  which were introduced in the 1930s and 1940s adequately capture computability in the intuitive sense. This belief is expressed in the w...
Some ComputabilityTheoretical Aspects of Reals and Randomness
 the Lect. Notes Log. 18, Assoc. for Symbol. Logic
, 2001
"... We study computably enumerable reals (i.e. their left cut is computably enumerable) in terms of their spectra of representations and presentations. ..."
Abstract

Cited by 24 (7 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We study computably enumerable reals (i.e. their left cut is computably enumerable) in terms of their spectra of representations and presentations.
An extension of the recursively enumerable Turing degrees
 Journal of the London Mathematical Society
, 2006
"... Consider the countable semilattice RT consisting of the recursively enumerable Turing degrees. Although RT is known to be structurally rich, a major source of frustration is that no specific, natural degrees in RT have been discovered, except the bottom and top degrees, 0 and 0 ′. In order to overco ..."
Abstract

Cited by 22 (16 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Consider the countable semilattice RT consisting of the recursively enumerable Turing degrees. Although RT is known to be structurally rich, a major source of frustration is that no specific, natural degrees in RT have been discovered, except the bottom and top degrees, 0 and 0 ′. In order to overcome this difficulty, we embed RT into a larger degree structure which is better behaved. Namely, consider the countable distributive lattice Pw consisting of the weak degrees (also known as Muchnik degrees) of mass problems associated with nonempty Π 0 1 subsets of 2ω. It is known that Pw contains a bottom degree 0 and a top degree 1 and is structurally rich. Moreover, Pw contains many specific, natural degrees other than 0 and 1. In particular, we show that in Pw one has 0 < d < r1 < inf(r2, 1) < 1. Here, d is the weak degree of the diagonally nonrecursive functions, and rn is the weak degree of the nrandom reals. It is known that r1 can be characterized as the maximum weak degree ofaΠ 0 1 subset of 2ω of positive measure. We now show that inf(r2, 1) can be characterized as the maximum weak degree of a Π 0 1 subset of 2ω, the Turing upward closure of which is of positive measure. We exhibit a natural embedding of RT into Pw which is onetoone, preserves the semilattice structure of RT, carries 0 to 0, and carries 0 ′ to 1. Identifying RT with its image in Pw, we show that all of the degrees in RT except 0 and 1 are incomparable with the specific degrees d, r1, and inf(r2, 1) inPw. 1.
Relative to a random oracle, NP is not small
 In Proc. 9th Structures
, 1994
"... Resourcebounded measure as originated by Lutz is an extension of classical measure theory which provides a probabilistic means of describing the relative sizes of complexity classes. Lutz has proposed the hypothesis that NP does not have pmeasure zero, meaning loosely that NP contains a nonneglig ..."
Abstract

Cited by 18 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Resourcebounded measure as originated by Lutz is an extension of classical measure theory which provides a probabilistic means of describing the relative sizes of complexity classes. Lutz has proposed the hypothesis that NP does not have pmeasure zero, meaning loosely that NP contains a nonnegligible subset of exponential time. This hypothesis implies a strong separation of P from NP and is supported by a growing body of plausible consequences which are not known to follow from the weaker assertion P ̸ = NP. It is shown in this paper that relative to a random oracle, NP does not have pmeasure zero. The proof exploits the following independence property of algorithmically random sequences: if A is an algorithmically random sequence and a subsequence A0 is chosen by means of a bounded KolmogorovLoveland