Embedding lattices into the wtt-degrees below 0′

1994 ◽  
Vol 59 (4) ◽  
pp. 1360-1382
Author(s):  
Rod Downey ◽  
Christine Haught

A reducibility ≤p is a procedure whereby a set A can be computed from a set B. The most general and most extensively studied reducibility is Turing reducibility (≤T). However, when one analyzes effectiveness considerations in classical mathematics, one often discovers that the relevant reducibilities are stronger (i.e., more restrictive) than ≤T. To illustrate, in combinatorial group theory we find that the word problem is many-one reducible to the conjugacy problem, and that word problems occur in each r.e. truth table (tt-) degree (see, for example, Miller [17]).In the present paper we are concerned with another strong reducibility: weak truth table (wtt-) reducibility. Here the reader should recall that A ≤wtt, β means that there is a procedure Φ and a recursive function φ such that Φ(β) = A and for all x, the u(Φ(β; X)) < φ (x). That is, the amount of information used in the computation is bounded by φ. The critical difference between truth table and weak truth table reducibilities is that for tt we will at once be “given the whole table.” Thus if Δ is a tt-procedure and δ is its use, then for all x and all strings σ of length δ(x) we can figure out Δ(σ; x). On the other hand if Δ is merely a wtt-procedure it may be that for some string σ, Δ(σ; x)↓, whilst for another string μ of the same length it may be that Δ{μ; x) ↑. We remark that wtt-reducibility arises very naturally both in effective algebra and in the structure of the r.e. T-degrees R. The reader should see, for instance, Downey and Remmel [3], where it is shown that the complexity of r.e. bases of an r.e. vector space V is characterised precisely by the wtt-degrees below V, and also Ladner and Sasso [14] or Downey [1], where the wtt-degrees are used to investigate cupping and capping in R.


2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 7-14
Author(s):  
I. V. Dobrynina ◽  
◽  
E. L. Turenova ◽  

The main algorithmic problems of combinatorial group theory posed by M. Den and G. Titze at the beginning of the twentieth century are the problems of word, word conjugacy and of group isomorphism. However, these problems, as follows from the results of P.S. Novikov and S.I. Adyan, turned out to be unsolvable in the class of finitely defined groups. Therefore, algorithmic problems began to be considered in specific classes of groups. The word conjugacy problem allows for two generalizations. On the one hand, we consider the problem of conjugacy of subgroups, that is, the problem of constructing an algorithm that allows for any two finitely generated subgroups to determine whether they are conjugate or not. On the other hand, the problem of generalized conjugacy of words is posed, that is, the problem of constructing an algorithm that allows for any two finite sets of words to determine whether they are conjugated or not. Combining both of these generalizations into one, we obtain the problem of generalized conjugacy of subgroups. Coxeter groups were introduced in the 30s of the last century, and the problems of equality and conjugacy of words are algorithmically solvable in them. To solve other algorithmic problems, various subclasses are distinguished. This is partly due to the unsolvability in Coxeter groups of another important problem – the problem of occurrence, that is, the problem of the existence of an algorithm that allows for any word and any finitely generated subgroup of a certain group to determine whether this word belongs to this subgroup or not. The paper proves the algorithmic solvability of the problem of generalized conjugacy of subgroups in Coxeter groups with a tree structure.





2012 ◽  
Vol 430-432 ◽  
pp. 834-837
Author(s):  
Xiao Qiang Guo ◽  
Zheng Jun He

First we introduce the history of group theory. Group theory has three main historical sources: number theory, the theory of algebraic equations, and geometry. Secondly, we give the main classes of groups: permutation groups, matrix groups, transformation groups, abstract groups and topological and algebraic groups. Finally, we give two different presentations of a group: combinatorial group theory and geometric group theory.





Author(s):  
Roger C. Lyndon ◽  
Paul E. Schupp




Author(s):  
G. Baumslag ◽  
T. Camps ◽  
B. Fine ◽  
G. Rosenberger ◽  
X. Xu


2002 ◽  
Vol 12 (01n02) ◽  
pp. 179-211 ◽  
Author(s):  
MANUEL DELGADO ◽  
STUART MARGOLIS ◽  
BENJAMIN STEINBERG

This paper explores various connections between combinatorial group theory, semigroup theory, and formal language theory. Let G = <A|R> be a group presentation and ℬA, R its standard 2-complex. Suppose X is a 2-complex with a morphism to ℬA, R which restricts to an immersion on the 1-skeleton. Then we associate an inverse monoid to X which algebraically encodes topological properties of the morphism. Applications are given to separability properties of groups. We also associate an inverse monoid M(A, R) to the presentation <A|R> with the property that pointed subgraphs of covers of ℬA, R are classified by closed inverse submonoids of M(A, R). In particular, we obtain an inverse monoid theoretic condition for a subgroup to be quasiconvex allowing semigroup theoretic variants on the usual proofs that the intersection of such subgroups is quasiconvex and that such subgroups are finitely generated. Generalizations are given to non-geodesic combings. We also obtain a formal language theoretic equivalence to quasiconvexity which holds even for groups which are not hyperbolic. Finally, we illustrate some applications of separability properties of relatively free groups to finite semigroup theory. In particular, we can deduce the decidability of various semidirect and Mal/cev products of pseudovarieties of monoids with equational pseudovarieties of nilpotent groups and with the pseudovariety of metabelian groups.



Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document