首页> 外文会议>Annual ACM/IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science >How unprovable is Rabin’s decidability theorem?
【24h】

How unprovable is Rabin’s decidability theorem?

机译:Rabin的可辨ic是定理如何无法移动?

获取原文

摘要

We study the strength of set-theoretic axioms needed to prove Rabin's theorem on the decidability of the MSO theory of the infinite binary tree. We first show that over the second-order arithmetic theory ACA0, the complementation theorem for nondeterministic tree automata is equivalent to a statement expressing the determinacy of all Gale-Stewart games given by Bool(Σ20) sets. It follows that the complementation theorem is provable from II31 but not Δ31- comprehension. We then use results due to MedSalem-Tanaka, Mollerfeld and Heinatsch-Mollerfeld to prove that · the complementation theorem for non-deterministic tree automata, · the decidability of the Π1 3 fragment of MSO on the infinite binary tree, · the positional determinacy of parity games, and · the determinacy of Bool(Σ20) Gale-Stewart games are all equivalent over II21-comprehension. It follows in particular that Rabin's decidability theorem is not provable from Δ31- comprehension.
机译:我们研究了所需的设定理论理公理的强度,以证明Rabin的定理对无限二叉树的MSO理论的可辨icis。我们首先表现出在二阶算术理论ACA 0 ,非罚化树Automata的互补定理相当于表达BOOL给出的所有峡谷斯图尔特游戏的决定性的陈述(Σ 2 0 ) 套。因此,互补定理可从II中提供 3 1 但不是δ 3 1 - 理解。然后我们通过Medsalem-Tanaka,Mollerfeld和Heinatsch-Mollerfeld使用结果证明了非确定性树自动机的互补定理,·MSO在无限二叉树上的π13片段的可解锁性,·位置确定奇偶比赛,以及BOOL的决定性(Σ 2 0 )Gale-Stewart游戏相当于II 2 1 -理解。特别是,Rabin的可译种定理是不可提供的δ 3 1 - 理解。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号