Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c47g7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T22:45:04.116Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Type two partial degrees1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

Ko-Wei Lih*
Affiliation:
Institute of Mathematics, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan

Extract

Roughly speaking partial degrees are equivalence classes of partial objects under a certain notion of relative recursiveness. To make this notion precise we have to state explicitly (1) what these partial objects are; (2) how to define a suitable reduction procedure. For example, when the type of these objects is restricted to one, we may include all possible partial functions from natural numbers to natural numbers as basic objects and the reduction procedure could be enumeration, weak Turing, or Turing reducibility as expounded in Sasso [4]. As we climb up the ladder of types, we see that the usual definitions of relative recursiveness, equivalent in the context of type-1 total objects and functions, may be extended to partial objects and functions in quite different ways. First such generalization was initiated by Kleene [2]. He considers partial functions with total objects as arguments. However his theory suffers the lack of transitivity, i.e. we may not obtain a recursive function when we substitute a recursive function into a recursive function. Although Kleene's theory provides a nice background for the study of total higher type objects, it would be unsatisfactory when partial higher type objects are being investigated. In this paper we choose the hierarchy of hereditarily consistent objects over ω as our universe of discourse so that Sasso's objects are exactly those at the type-1 level. Following Kleene's fashion we define relative recursiveness via schemes and indices. Yet in our theory, substitution will preserve recursiveness, which makes a degree theory of partial higher type objects possible. The final result will be a natural extension of Sasso's Turing reducibility. Due to the abstract nature of these objects we do not know much about their behaviour except at the very low types. Here we pay our attention mainly to type-2 objects. In §2 we formulate basic notions and give an outline of our recursion theory of partial higher type objects. In §3 we introduce the definitions of singular degrees and ω-consistent degrees which are two important classes of type-2 objects that we are most interested in.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 1978

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

1

Much of this work is contained in a chapter of the author's doctoral dissertation at Duke University under the guidance of Professor Joseph R. Shoenfield to whom the author expresses his deepest appreciation.

References

REFERENCES

[1]Lih, Ko-Wei, Recursive functions of hereditarily consistent objects, Ph.D. Dissertation, Duke University, 1976.Google Scholar
[2]Kleene, S. C., Recursive functional and quantifiers of finite type. I, II, Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 91 (1959), pp. 152; Transactions of the American Mathematical Society vol. 108 (1963), pp. 106–142.Google Scholar
[3]Platek, R., Foundations of recursion theory, Ph.D. Dissertation, Stanford University, 1966.Google Scholar
[4]Sasso, L. P. Jr., A survey of partial degrees, this Journal, vol. 40 (1975), pp. 130140.Google Scholar