1995
DOI: 10.1007/3-540-60178-3_90
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The hierarchy of terminating recursive programs over N

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

1998
1998
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 9 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Either one simply accepts this situation and does the best one can (and we will, later, in section 4); or alternatively one could shift the goalposts and try to reconsider the problem in a more amenable, generalized setting. One suitable place to look is the theory of type two recursive functionals where, as noted by Kleene (1958) and in stark contrast with the recursive functions, a good notation-free hierarchy already exists -by classifying total recursive functionals according to the ordinal heights of their trees of unsecured sequences (see also Wainer (1995)). This opens the possibility of coding and comparing recursive ordinals in terms of the majorization relationship between certain descent-recursive functionals which represent them.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Either one simply accepts this situation and does the best one can (and we will, later, in section 4); or alternatively one could shift the goalposts and try to reconsider the problem in a more amenable, generalized setting. One suitable place to look is the theory of type two recursive functionals where, as noted by Kleene (1958) and in stark contrast with the recursive functions, a good notation-free hierarchy already exists -by classifying total recursive functionals according to the ordinal heights of their trees of unsecured sequences (see also Wainer (1995)). This opens the possibility of coding and comparing recursive ordinals in terms of the majorization relationship between certain descent-recursive functionals which represent them.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%