Let ω be the set of natural numbers, i.e. {0, 1, 2, 3, …}. A string is a mapping from an initial segment of ω into {0, 1}. We identify a set A ≤ ω with its characteristic function. A set A ≤ ω is called n-generic if it is Cohen-generic for n-quantifier arithmetic. This is equivalent to saying that for every set of strings S, there is a σ < A such that σ ∈ S or (∀ν ≥ σ)(ν ∉ S). By degree we mean Turing degree (of unsolvability). We call a degree n-generic if it has an n-generic representative. For a degree a, D(≤ a) denotes the set of degrees recursive in a.

The relation between generic degrees and minimal degrees has been widely studied. Spector [9] proved the existence of minimal degrees. Shoenfield [8] simplified the proof by using trees. In the construction of a minimal degree, given σ we extend σ to ν so that ν is in the (splitting or nonsplitting) subtree of a given tree. But in the construction of a generic set, given σ we extend σ to ν to meet the given dense set. So these two constructions are quite different. Jockusch [5] showed that any 2-generic degree bounds no minimal degree. Chong and Jockusch [3] showed that any 1-generic degree below 0′ bounds no minimal degree.

We show that provability in the implicational fragment of relevance logic is complete for doubly exponential time, using reductions to and from coverability in branching vector addition systems.

Let Dtt denote the set of truth-table degrees. A bijection π: Dtt → Dtt is an automorphism if for all truth-table degrees x and y we have x ≤tty ⇔ π(x) ≤ttπ(y). We say an automorphism π is fixed on a cone if there is a degree b such that for all x ≥ttb we have π(x) = x. We first prove that for every 2-generic real X we have X′ ≰ttX ⊕ 0′. We next prove that for every real X ≥tt 0′ there is a real Y such that Y ⊕ 0′ ≡ttY′ ≡ttX. Finally, we use this to demonstrate that every automorphism of the truth-table degrees is fixed on a cone.

We use NF to designate the system known as Quine's New Foundations (see [1] and [2]), and NF + AF to designate the same system with a suitable axiom of infinity adjoined. We use ML to designate the revised system appearing in the third printing of Quine's “Mathematical Logic” (see [3]). This system ML is just the system P proposed by Wang in [4], and essentially includes NF as a part.

The pripcipal results of the present paper are:

A. In NF the axiom of infinity is equivalent to the definability of an ordered pair having the same type as its constituents.

B. Considering the formulas of NF as having translations in the formalism of ML in the sense defined in [4], we find that a formula of NF is provable in NF if and only if its translation is provable in ML. From the fact that the axiom of infinity is provable in ML, one might be tempted to conclude that the axiom of infinity is provable in NF. It is explained why this is not a valid inference. Consequently, it would appear that there is a sense in which NF + AF is stronger than ML.

The number of homogeneous models has been studied in [1] and other papers. But the number of countable homogeneous models of a countable theory T is not determined when dropping the GCH. Morley in [2] proves that if a countable theory T has more than ℵ1 nonisomorphic countable models, then it has such models. He conjectures that if a countable theory T has more than ℵ0 nonisomorphic countable models, then it has such models. In this paper we show that if a countable theory T has more than ℵ0 nonisomorphic countable homogeneous models, then it has such models.

We adopt the conventions in [1]–[3]. Throughout the paper T is a theory and the language of T is denoted by L which is countable.

Lemma 1. If a theory T has more than ℵ0types, then T hasnonisomorphic countable homogeneous models.

Proof. Suppose that T has more than ℵ0 types. From [2, Corollary 2.4] T has types. Let σ be a Ttype with n variables, and T′ = T ⋃ {σ(c1, …, cn)}, where c1, …, cn are new constants. T′ is consistent and has a countable model (, a1, …, an). From [3, Theorem 3.2.8] the reduced model has a countable homogeneous elementary extension . σ is realized in . This shows that every type σ is realized in at least one countable homogeneous model of T. But each countable model can realize at most ℵ0 types. Hence T has at least countable homogeneous models. On the other hand, a countable theory can have at most nonisomorphic countable models. Hence the number of nonisomorphic countable homogeneous models of T is .

In the following, we shall use the languages Lα (α = 0, 1, 2) defined in [2]. We give a brief description of them. For a countable theory T, let K be the class of all models of T. L = L0 is countable.

We show that it is consistent with ZFC + ¬CH that there is a maximal cofinitary group (or, maximal almost disjoint group) G ≤ Sym(ω) such that G is a proper subset of an almost disjoint family A ⊆ Sym(ω) and ‖G‖ < ‖A‖. We also ask several questions in this area.

We prove a number of results about countable Borel equivalence relations with forcing constructions and arguments. These results reveal hidden regularity properties of Borel complete sections on certain orbits. As consequences they imply the nonexistence of Borel complete sections with certain features.

We study the automorphism group of the algebraic closure of a substructure A of a pseudo-finite field F. We show that the behavior of this group, even when A is large, depends essentially on the roots of unity in F. For almost all completions of the theory of pseudofinite fields, we show that over A, algebraic closure agrees with definable closure, as soon as A contains the relative algebraic closure of the prime field.

Elementary Recursive Nonstandard Analysis, in short ERNA, is a constructive system of nonstandard analysis proposed around 1995 by Patrick Suppes and Richard Sommer, who also proved its consistency inside PRA. It is based on an earlier system developed by Rolando Chuaqui and Patrick Suppes, of which Michal Rössler and Emil Jeřábek have recently proposed a weakened version. We add a Πı-transfer principle to ERNA and prove the consistency of the extended theory inside PRA. In this extension of ERNA a Σı-supremum principle ‘up-to-infinitesimals’, and some well-known calculus results for sequences are deduced. Finally, we prove that transfer is ‘too strong’ for finitism by reconsidering Rössler and Jeřábek's conclusions.

The study of recursion theory on models of fragments of Peano arithmetic has hitherto been concentrated on recursively enumerable (r.e.) sets and their degrees (with a few exceptions, such as that in [2] on minimal degrees). The reason for such a concerted effort is clear: priority arguments have occupied a central position in post Friedberg-Muchnik recursion theory, and after almost forty years of intensive development in the subject, they are still the essential tools on which investigations of r.e. sets and their degrees depend. There are two possible approaches to the study within fragments of arithmetic: To give a general analysis of strategies, and identify their proof-theoretic strengths (for example in [6] on infinite injury priority methods), or to consider specific theorems in recursion theory, and, if possible, pinpoint the exact levels of induction provably equivalent to the theorems. The work reported in this paper belongs to the second approach. More precisely, we single out two infinitary injury type constructions of r.e. sets—one concerning maximal sets and the other based on the notion of the jump operator—to be the topics of study.

We show that every nonzero enumeration degree bounds a nonsplitting nonzero enumeration degree.

Let DO denote the principle: Every infinite set has a dense linear ordering. DO is compared to other ordering principles such as O, the Linear Ordering principle, KW, the Kinna-Wagner Principle, and PI, the Prime Ideal Theorem, in ZF, Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory without AC, the Axiom of Choice.

The main result is:

Theorem. AC ⇒ KW ⇒ DO ⇒ O, and none of the implications is reversible in ZF + PI.

The first and third implications and their irreversibilities were known. The middle one is new. Along the way other results of interest are established. O, while not quite implying DO, does imply that every set differs finitely from a densely ordered set. The independence result for ZF is reduced to one for Fraenkel-Mostowski models by showing that DO falls into two of the known classes of statements automatically transferable from Fraenkel-Mostowski to ZF models. Finally, the proof of PI in the Fraenkel-Mostowski model leads naturally to versions of the Ramsey and Ehrenfeucht-Mostowski theorems involving sets that are both ordered and colored.

The usefulness of measurable cardinals in set theory arises in good part from the fact that an ultraproduct of wellfounded structures by a countably complete ultrafilter is wellfounded. In the standard proof of the wellfoundedness of such an ultraproduct, one first shows, without any use of the axiom of choice, that the ultraproduct contains no infinite descending chains. One then completes the proof by noting that, assuming the axiom of choice, any partial ordering with no infinite descending chain is wellfounded. In fact, the axiom of dependent choices (a weakened form of the axiom of choice) suffices. It is therefore of interest to ask whether some use of the axiom of choice is needed in order to prove the wellfoundedness of such ultraproducts or whether, on the other hand, their wellfoundedness can be proved in ZF alone. In Theorem 1, we show that the axiom of choice is needed for the proof (assuming the consistency of a strong partition relation). Theorem 1 also contains some related consistency results concerning infinite exponent partition relations. We then use Theorem 1 to show how to change the cofinality of a cardinal κ satisfying certain partition relations to any regular cardinal less than κ, while introducing no new bounded subsets of κ. This generalizes a theorem of Prikry [5].

It is well known that saturation of ideals is closely related to the “antichain-catching” phenomenon from Foreman–Magidor–Shelah [10]. We consider several antichain-catching properties that are weaker than saturation, and prove:

1. (1) If ${\cal I}$ is a normal ideal on $\omega _2 $ which satisfies stationary antichain catching, then there is an inner model with a Woodin cardinal;

2. (2) For any $n \in \omega $, it is consistent relative to large cardinals that there is a normal ideal ${\cal I}$ on $\omega _n $ which satisfies projective antichain catching, yet ${\cal I}$ is not saturated (or even strong). This provides a negative answer to Open Question number 13 from Foreman’s chapter in the Handbook of Set Theory ([7]).

In this paper we define by means of a partition property a decreasing sequence N = ‹Nα: α is an ordinal› of classes of ordinals. This property is a generalization of the nonexistence of special Aronszajn trees: the successor cardinal κ+ is in N0 iff there does not exist a special Aronszajn κ+-tree.

The interest in the classes Nα stems from their applicability in model theory, in particular to that aspect of model theory dealing with ordered and two-cardinal models. A model is κ-like iff < is a linear ordering of A of cardinality κ but such that every proper initial segment has cardinality < κ. is α-ordered iff ≼ is a reflexive, linear ordering of some subset of A with order type α. The sequence N can be characterized by a first-order sentence σ in the following manner: The sentence σ has a κ-like α-ordered model iff κ ∉ Nα. This characterization will allow us to translate various independence statements regarding the sequence N to statements about the independence of transfer properties. We say that the transfer property κ → λ holds iff every first-order sentence which has a κ-like model also has a λ-like model. κ ⇸ λ is the negation of κ → λ.

We give here alternative definitions for the notions that S. Shelah has introduced in recent papers: the dimensional order property and the depth of a theory. We will also give a proof that the depth of a countable theory, when denned, is an ordinal recursive in T.

We prove two results about generically stable types p in arbitrary theories. The first, on existence of strong germs, generalizes results from [2] on stably dominated types. The second is an equivalence of forking and dividing, assuming generic stability of p(m) for all m. We use the latter result to answer in full generality a question posed by Hasson and Onshuus: If P(x) ε S(B) is stable and does not fork over A then prestrictionA is stable. (They had solved some special cases.)

The Mycielski ideal is defined to consist of all sets A ⊆ ℕk such that {f ↾ X : f ∈ A} ≠ Xk for all . It will be shown that the covering numbers for these ideals are all equal. However, the covering numbers of the closely associated Rosłanowski ideals will be shown to be consistently different.