1986
DOI: 10.1002/malq.19860322514
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Relations Intrinsically Recursive in Linear Orders

Abstract: ZPrtsehr. f. rutitt~. Logik u i d Cruiidlagen d . bfath. Ba. 32, s. 461-412 ( 1~8 6 ) RELATIOXS ISTRIKSICALLY RECURSIVE IN LINEAR ORDERS by MICHAEL MOSES in Macomb, Illinois (U.S.A.)')A recursively enumerable (r.e.) relation R on a recursive structure 8 is said to be iirtrinsically r.e. on 8 if every isomorphism of 3 with a recursive structure carries R t o an r.e. relation. This concept was introduced in [l] by C . J. ASH and A. NERODE.It was shown in that paper that R is intrinsically r.e. if and only if it … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
14
0

Year Published

1998
1998
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
6
4

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
0
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…(ii) For any unary relation R on si, the following are equivalent: (a) The degree spectrum DgSp& (R) is upward closed under Turing reducibility; (b) The relation R is not intrinsically computable; (c) R cannot be defined by a quantifier-free formula with parameters from dom(si). (The equivalence of (b) and (c) had already been shown by Moses in [20].) As a corollary, Harizanov and Miller obtained from Miller's result in [19] that there is a relation R on si such that DgSp^(i?)…”
mentioning
confidence: 58%
“…(ii) For any unary relation R on si, the following are equivalent: (a) The degree spectrum DgSp& (R) is upward closed under Turing reducibility; (b) The relation R is not intrinsically computable; (c) R cannot be defined by a quantifier-free formula with parameters from dom(si). (The equivalence of (b) and (c) had already been shown by Moses in [20].) As a corollary, Harizanov and Miller obtained from Miller's result in [19] that there is a relation R on si such that DgSp^(i?)…”
mentioning
confidence: 58%
“…The implications 1 =⇒ 2 and 3 =⇒ 1 are immediate. In fact, Moses proved in [18] that 1 ⇐⇒ 2. To prove that 2 =⇒ 3, fix any degrees d ≤ T c, and suppose (using Lemma 1.6) that S ∈ d and (L, R) ∼ = (L, S).…”
Section: Dgsp L (R) Is Upward-closed Under Turing Reducibilitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In [30], Moses showed that, for any computable relation U on a linear ordering L, either U is definable by a quantifier free formula in the language of L expanded by finitely many constants (in which case it is obviously intrinsically computable) or there is a function f such that f(L) is a computable structure and f(U ) is not computable. It is clear from the proof of this result that, in the latter case, f can be chosen to be Δ 0 2 .…”
Section: Corollary Let U Be An Invariant Computable Relation On the mentioning
confidence: 99%