Abstract
Feedback is oracle computability when the oracle consists exactly of the con- and divergence information about computability relative to that same oracle. Here we study the feedback version of the hyperjump.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
This child is to be thought of as a piece of syntax acting as a placeholder, and not, for instance, as feedback computation, for which angle brackets \(\langle \rangle \) are also used.
- 2.
Sometimes we will have occasion to consider the computation \(\{\bar{e}\}(k)\) instead. Then implicity \(e = \langle \bar{e}, k \rangle \).
- 3.
It bears mention that there are several options for dealing with this clause. In all cases, the evidence that n is not an ordinal notation is that its tree \(U^{P}_{n}\) of smaller ordinal notations is bad somehow, either ill-formed or ill-founded. For \(P^+\), we took this in the strictest possible sense: \(U^{P}_{n}\) had to be non-freezing in order to qualify as evidence. For \( P^{ \& }\), there is no such requirement on \(U^P_n\) ever; once we have any evidence that \(U^{P}_{n}\) will not be acceptable, we take it. In contrast with both of these, one could work in the middle. That is, the reasons that \(U^{P}_{n}\) activate clause 2 are that it has a node not of the right form, or that the function named by a node is partial, or that the function named by a node is not increasing (in the sense of \(<_{P}\)), or that the tree has an infinite descending path; the requirement that \(U^{P}_{n}\) be non-freezing could, in principle, be levied on some and not all of these conditions. We find the two extreme cases isolated here to be the most natural ones; we believe that the only condition of any real importance is the well-foundedness of \(U^{P}_{n}\), and that varying the others will make no difference; determining this is left for future work.
References
Ackerman, N., Freer, C., Lubarsky, R.: Feedback turing computability, and turing computability as feedback. In: Proceedings of LICS 2015, Kyoto, Japan (2015). http://math.fau.edu/lubarsky/pubs.html
Ackerman, N., Freer, C., Lubarsky, R.: An introduction to feedback turing computability. J. Log. Comput., special issue on LFCS ’16 (2020, submitted). http://math.fau.edu/lubarsky/pubs.html
Arnold, A., Niwinski, D.: Rudiments of \(\mu \)-Calculus. Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics, vol. 146. North Holland, Amsterdam (2001)
Barwise, J.: Admissible Sets and Structures. Perspectives in Mathematical Logic. Springer, Berlin (1975)
Gostanian, R.: The next admissible ordinal. Ann. Math. Log. 17, 171–203 (1979)
Kleene, S.C.: Recursive functionals and quantifiers of finite types I. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 91, 1–53 (1959)
Lubarsky, R.: \(\mu \)-definable sets of integers. J. Symb. Log. 58(1), 291–313 (1993)
Lubarsky, R.: ITTMs with feedback. In: Schindler, R. (ed.) Ways of Proof Theory, pp. 341–354. Ontos, Frankfurt (2010). http://math.fau.edu/lubarsky/pubs.html
Lubarsky, R.S.: Parallel feedback turing computability. In: Artemov, S., Nerode, A. (eds.) LFCS 2016. LNCS, vol. 9537, pp. 236–250. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27683-0_17
Moschovakis, Y.: Descriptive Set Theory, 1st edn. North Holland, Amsterdam (1987). 2nd edn. AMS (2009)
Richter, W., Aczel, P.: Inductive definitions and reflecting properties of admissible ordinals. In: Fenstad, J.E., Hinman, P.G. (eds.) Generalized Recursion Theory, pp. 301–381. North-Holland, Amsterdam (1974)
Rogers, H.: Theory of Recursive Functions and Effective Computability. McGraw-Hill, New York (1967)
Sacks, G.: Higher Recursion Theory. Perspectives in Mathematical Logic. Springer, Berlin (1990)
Tanaka, K.: The Galvin-Prikry theorem and set existence axioms. Ann. Pure Appl. Log. 42(1), 81–104 (1989)
Tanaka, K.: Weak axioms of determinacy and subsystems of analysis II (\(\Sigma ^0_2\) games). Ann. Pure Appl. Log. 52(1–2), 181–193 (1991)
Welch, P.: G\(_{\delta \sigma }\)-games and generalized computation (to appear)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Lubarsky, R.S. (2020). Feedback Hyperjump. In: Artemov, S., Nerode, A. (eds) Logical Foundations of Computer Science. LFCS 2020. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11972. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-36755-8_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-36755-8_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-36754-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-36755-8
eBook Packages: Mathematics and StatisticsMathematics and Statistics (R0)