## Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic

### Refining the Taming of the Reverse Mathematics Zoo

Sam Sanders

#### Abstract

Reverse mathematics is a program in the foundations of mathematics. It provides an elegant classification in which the majority of theorems of ordinary mathematics fall into only five categories, based on the “big five” logical systems. Recently, a lot of effort has been directed toward finding exceptional theorems, that is, those which fall outside the big five. The so-called reverse mathematics zoo is a collection of such exceptional theorems (and their relations). It was previously shown that a number of uniform versions of the zoo theorems, that is, where a functional computes the objects stated to exist, fall in the third big five category, arithmetical comprehension, inside Kohlenbach’s higher-order reverse mathematics. In this paper, we extend and refine these previous results. In particular, we establish analogous results for recent additions to the reverse mathematics zoo, thus establishing that the latter disappear at the uniform level. Furthermore, we show that the aforementioned equivalences can be proved using only intuitionistic logic. Perhaps most surprisingly, these explicit equivalences are extracted from nonstandard equivalences in Nelson’s internal set theory, and we show that the nonstandard equivalence can be recovered from the explicit ones. Finally, the following zoo theorems are studied in this paper: $\Pi^{0}_{1}\textsf{G}$ (existence of uniformly $\Pi^{0}_{1}$-generics), $\textsf{FIP}$ (finite intersection principle), 1-GEN (existence of $1$-generics), OPT (omitting partial types principle), AMT (atomic model theorem), SADS (stable ascending or descending sequence), AST (atomic model theorem with subenumerable types), NCS (existence of noncomputable sets), and KPT (Kleene–Post theorem that there exist Turing incomparable sets).

#### Article information

Source
Notre Dame J. Formal Logic, Volume 59, Number 4 (2018), 579-597.

Dates
Received: 12 October 2015
Accepted: 12 June 2016
First available in Project Euclid: 12 October 2018

Permanent link to this document
https://projecteuclid.org/euclid.ndjfl/1539309631

Digital Object Identifier
doi:10.1215/00294527-2018-0015

Mathematical Reviews number (MathSciNet)
MR3871902

Zentralblatt MATH identifier
06996545

#### Citation

Sanders, Sam. Refining the Taming of the Reverse Mathematics Zoo. Notre Dame J. Formal Logic 59 (2018), no. 4, 579--597. doi:10.1215/00294527-2018-0015. https://projecteuclid.org/euclid.ndjfl/1539309631

#### References

• [1] Ambos-Spies, K., B. Kjos-Hanssen, S. Lempp, and T. A. Slaman, “Comparing DNR and WWKL,” Journal of Symbolic Logic, vol. 69 (2004), pp. 1089–104.
• [2] Avigad, J., and S. Feferman, “Gödel’s functional (‘Dialectica’) interpretation,” pp. 337–405 in Handbook of Proof Theory, edited by S. R. Boss, vol. 137 of Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1998.
• [3] Cholak, P. A., R. Downey, and G. Igusa, “Any FIP real computes a $1$-generic,” Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 369 (2017), pp. 5855–69.
• [4] Downey, R. G., and D. R. Hirschfeldt, Algorithmic Randomness and Complexity, Theory and Applications of Computability, Springer, New York, 2010.
• [5] Dzhafarov, D. D., Reverse Mathematics Zoo, http://rmzoo.uconn.edu.
• [6] Dzhafarov, D. D., and C. Mummert, “On the strength of the finite intersection principle,” Israel Journal of Mathematics, vol. 196 (2013), pp. 345–61.
• [7] Giusto, M., and S. G. Simpson, “Located sets and reverse mathematics,” Journal of Symbolic Logic, vol. 65 (2000), pp. 1451–80.
• [8] Hirschfeldt, D. R., Slicing the Truth, vol. 28 of Lecture Notes Series, Institute for Mathematical Sciences, National University of Singapore, World Scientific, Hackensack, N.J., 2015.
• [9] Hirschfeldt, D. R., R. A. Shore, and T. A. Slaman, “The atomic model theorem and type omitting,” Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 361, no. 11 (2009), pp. 5805–37.
• [10] Kleene, S. C., and E. L. Post, “The upper semi-lattice of degrees of recursive unsolvability,” Annals of Mathematics (2), vol. 59 (1954), pp. 379–407.
• [11] Kohlenbach, U., “Higher order reverse mathematics,” pp. 281–95 in Reverse Mathematics 2001, vol. 21 of Lecture Notes in Logic, Association for Symbolic Logic, La Jolla, Calif., 2005.
• [12] Montalbán, A., “Open questions in reverse mathematics,” Bulletin of Symbolic Logic, vol. 17 (2011), pp. 431–54.
• [13] Nelson, E., “Internal set theory: a new approach to nonstandard analysis,” Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 83 (1977), pp. 1165–98.
• [14] Robinson, A., Non-Standard Analysis, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1966.
• [15] Sanders, S., “The taming of the reverse mathematics zoo,” preprint, arXiv:1412.2022v6 [math.LO].
• [16] Sanders, S., “The unreasonable effectiveness of nonstandard analysis,” preprint, arXiv:1508.07434v3 [math.LO].
• [17] Simpson, S. G. (ed.), Reverse Mathematics 2001, vol. 21 of Lecture Notes in Logic, Association for Symbolic Logic, La Jolla, Calif., 2005.
• [18] Simpson, S. G., Subsystems of Second Order Arithmetic, 2nd edition, Perspectives in Logic, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2009.
• [19] Soare, R. I., Recursively Enumerable Sets and Degrees, Perspectives in Mathematical Logic, Springer, Berlin, 1987.
• [20] Troelstra, A. S., and D. van Dalen, Constructivism in Mathematics. Vol. I, vol. 121 of Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1988.
• [21] van den Berg, B., E. Briseid, and P. Safarik, “A functional interpretation for nonstandard arithmetic,” Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, vol. 163 (2012), pp. 1962–94.
• [22] van den Berg, B., and S. Sanders, “Reverse mathematics and parameter-free transfer,” to appear in Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, preprint, arXiv:1409.6881v2 [math.LO].
• [23] Yu, X., “Lebesgue convergence theorems and reverse mathematics,” Mathematical Logic Quarterly, vol. 40 (1994), pp. 1–13.
• [24] Yu, X., and S. G. Simpson, “Measure theory and weak König’s lemma,” Archive for Mathematical Logic, vol. 30 (1990), pp. 171–80.