-
Irreducibles and primes in computable integral domains
Authors:
Leigh Evron,
Joseph R. Mileti,
Ethan Ratliff-Crain
Abstract:
A computable ring is a ring equipped with mechanical procedure to add and multiply elements. In most natural computable integral domains, there is a computational procedure to determine if a given element is prime/irreducible. However, there do exist computable UFDs (in fact, polynomial rings over computable fields) where the set of prime/irreducible elements is not computable. Outside of the clas…
▽ More
A computable ring is a ring equipped with mechanical procedure to add and multiply elements. In most natural computable integral domains, there is a computational procedure to determine if a given element is prime/irreducible. However, there do exist computable UFDs (in fact, polynomial rings over computable fields) where the set of prime/irreducible elements is not computable. Outside of the class of UFDs, the notions of irreducible and prime may not coincide. We demonstrate how different these concepts can be by constructing computable integral domains where the set of irreducible elements is computable while the set of prime elements is not, and vice versa. Along the way, we will generalize Kronecker's method for computing irreducibles and factorizations in $\mathbb{Z}[x]$.
△ Less
Submitted 22 July, 2014;
originally announced July 2014.
-
The Complexity of Primes in Computable UFDs
Authors:
Damir D. Dzhafarov,
Joseph R. Mileti
Abstract:
In many simple integral domains, such as $\mathbb{Z}$ or $\mathbb{Z}[i]$, there is a straightforward procedure to determine if an element is prime by simply reducing to a direct check of finitely many potential divisors. Despite the fact that such a naive approach does not immediately translate to integral domains like $\mathbb{Z}[x]$ or the ring of integers in an algebraic number field, there sti…
▽ More
In many simple integral domains, such as $\mathbb{Z}$ or $\mathbb{Z}[i]$, there is a straightforward procedure to determine if an element is prime by simply reducing to a direct check of finitely many potential divisors. Despite the fact that such a naive approach does not immediately translate to integral domains like $\mathbb{Z}[x]$ or the ring of integers in an algebraic number field, there still exist computational procedures that work to determine the prime elements in these cases. In contrast, we will show how to computably extend $\mathbb{Z}$ in such a way that we can control the ordinary integer primes in any $Π_2^0$ way, all while maintaining unique factorization. As a corollary, we establish the existence of a computable UFD such that the set of primes is $Π_2^0$-complete in every computable presentation.
△ Less
Submitted 21 July, 2014; v1 submitted 9 July, 2014;
originally announced July 2014.
-
On uniform relationships between combinatorial problems
Authors:
François G. Dorais,
Damir D. Dzhafarov,
Jeffry L. Hirst,
Joseph R. Mileti,
Paul Shafer
Abstract:
The enterprise of comparing mathematical theorems according to their logical strength is an active area in mathematical logic. In this setting, called reverse mathematics, one investigates which theorems provably imply which others in a weak formal theory roughly corresponding to computable mathematics. Since the proofs of such implications take place in classical logic, they may in principle in…
▽ More
The enterprise of comparing mathematical theorems according to their logical strength is an active area in mathematical logic. In this setting, called reverse mathematics, one investigates which theorems provably imply which others in a weak formal theory roughly corresponding to computable mathematics. Since the proofs of such implications take place in classical logic, they may in principle involve appeals to multiple applications of a particular theorem, or to non-uniform decisions about how to proceed in a given construction. In practice, however, if a theorem $\mathsf{Q}$ implies a theorem $\mathsf{P}$, it is usually because there is a direct uniform translation of the problems represented by $\mathsf{P}$ into the problems represented by $\mathsf{Q}$, in a precise sense. We study this notion of uniform reducibility in the context of several natural combinatorial problems, and compare and contrast it with the traditional notion of implication in reverse mathematics. We show, for instance, that for all $n,j,k \geq 1$, if $j < k$ then Ramsey's theorem for $n$-tuples and $k$ many colors does not uniformly reduce to Ramsey's theorem for $j$ many colors. The two theorems are classically equivalent, so our analysis gives a genuinely finer metric by which to gauge the relative strength of mathematical propositions. We also study Weak König's Lemma, the Thin Set Theorem, and the Rainbow Ramsey's Theorem, along with a number of their variants investigated in the literature. Uniform reducibility turns out to be connected with sequential forms of mathematical principles, where one wishes to solve infinitely many instances of a particular problem simultaneously. We exploit this connection to uncover new points of difference between combinatorial problems previously thought to be more closely related.
△ Less
Submitted 16 April, 2015; v1 submitted 1 December, 2012;
originally announced December 2012.
