Jump to content

Slow-growing hierarchy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 78.23.219.80 (talk) at 20:04, 2 July 2013 (Relation to fast-growing hierarchy). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

In computability theory, computational complexity theory and proof theory, the slow-growing hierarchy is an ordinal-indexed family of slowly increasing functions gα: NN (where N is the set of natural numbers, {0, 1, ...}). It contrasts with the fast-growing hierarchy.

Definition

Let μ be a large countable ordinal such that a fundamental sequence is assigned to every limit ordinal less than μ. The slow-growing hierarchy of functions gα: NN, for α < μ, is then defined as follows:

  • for limit ordinal α.

Here α[n] denotes the nth element of the fundamental sequence assigned to the limit ordinal α.

The article on the Fast-growing hierarchy describes a standardized choice for fundamental sequence for all α < ε0.

Relation to fast-growing hierarchy

The slow-growing hierarchy grows much more slowly than the fast-growing hierarchy. Even gε0 is only equivalent to f3 and gα only attains the growth of fε0 (the first function that Peano arithmetic cannot prove total in the hierarchy) when α is the Bachmann–Howard ordinal.[1][2][3]

However, Girard proved that the slow-growing hierarchy eventually catches up with the fast-growing one.[1] Specifically, that there exists an ordinal α such that such that for all integers n

gα(n) < fα(n) < gα(n + 1)

where fα are the functions in the fast-growing hierarchy. He further showed that the first α this holds for is the ordinal of the theory ID of arbitrary finite iterations of an inductive definition.[4] However for the assignment of fundamental sequences[2] the first match up occurs at the level ε0.[5]

Extensions of the result proved[4] to considerably larger ordinals show that there are very few ordinals below the ordinal of transfinitely iterated -comprehension where the slow and fast growing hierarchy match up.[6]

The slow growing hierarchy depends extremely sensitively on the choice of the underlying fundamental sequences.[5]Cite error: A <ref> tag is missing the closing </ref> (see the help page).

Relation to term rewriting

Cichon provided an interesting connection between the slow growing hierarchy and derivation length for term rewriting.[2]

References

  • Gallier, Jean H. (1991). "What's so special about Kruskal's theorem and the ordinal Γ0? A survey of some results in proof theory". Ann. Pure Appl. Logic. 53 (3): 199–260. doi:10.1016/0168-0072(91)90022-E. MR 1129778Template:Inconsistent citations{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: postscript (link) PDF's: part 1 2 3. (In particular part 3, Section 12, pp. 59–64, "A Glimpse at Hierarchies of Fast and Slow Growing Functions".)

Notes

  1. ^ a b Girard, Jean-Yves (1981). "Π12-logic. I. Dilators". Annals of Mathematical Logic. 21 (2): 75–219. doi:10.1016/0003-4843(81)90016-4. ISSN 0003-4843. MR 0656793Template:Inconsistent citations{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: postscript (link)
  2. ^ a b c Cichon (1992). "Termination Proofs and Complexity Characterisations". In P. Aczel, H. Simmons, S. Wainer (ed.). Proof Theory. Cambridge University Press. pp. 173–193.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: editors list (link)
  3. ^ Cichon, E. A.; Wainer, S. S. (1983). "The slow-growing and the Grzegorczyk hierarchies". The Journal of Symbolic Logic. 48 (2): 399–408. doi:10.2307/2273557. ISSN 0022-4812. MR 0704094Template:Inconsistent citations{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: postscript (link)
  4. ^ a b Wainer, S. S. (1989). "Slow Growing Versus Fast Growing". The Journal of Symbolic Logic. 54 (2): 608–614. doi:10.2307/2274873. JSTOR 2274873.
  5. ^ a b Weiermann, A (1997). "Sometimes slow growing is fast growing". Annals of Pure and Applied Logic. 90: 91. doi:10.1016/S0168-0072(97)00033-X.
  6. ^ Weiermann, A. (1995). Archives of Mathematical Logic. 34: 313–330. {{cite journal}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)