FO(≤, +, ×) = FO(≤, +, BIT)

Lax895169.ACZeroIsBitLogic · concepts/Lax895169/ACZeroIsBitLogic.lean · lax-895169

proven

Loading review…

Sign in with ORCID

Community review

Flags

Each flag is tied to a public ORCID identity and explains why this concept may be incorrect.

No flags have been submitted.

    Community review

    Flag this concept

    State precisely what appears incorrect. This explanation will be public under your ORCID name.

    No source line selected.

    Natural Language Statement

    Theorem

    A decision problem is AC⁰ definable, that is, definable in FO(≤,+,×\le, +, \times), if and only if it is bit-definable, that is, definable by a prenex sentence of FO(≤,+\le, +, BIT). One direction defines the map i↦2ii \mapsto 2^i from addition and multiplication, by guessing a doubling chain. The other defines multiplication from BIT, which rests on the Bit Sum Lemma, counting the ones of a word of logarithmic length; the product is then assembled from its columns with guessed carry chains. This is the identification of the two vocabularies in Immerman's Descriptive Complexity, Theorem 1.17.

    Concept map
    22 concepts
    100%
    Proven claimDefinitionThis conceptRelated conceptA → B: B builds on A
    Evidence

    This concept declares 2 statements. Each proof establishes one of them relative to its assumptions.

    1 ac0Definable_bitDefinable proven

    2 bitDefinable_ac0Definable proven

    Lean source view on GitHub

    1import Lax904597.Problems
    2import Lax904597.Classes
    3import Lax485149.Complement
    4import Lax485149.FirstOrderDefinability
    5import Lax485149.DeterministicTransitiveClosure
    6import Lax485149.ClassNL
    7import Lax485149.ClassL
    8import Lax535992.LeastFixedPoint
    9import Lax535992.InflationaryFixedPoint
    10import Lax535992.ClassPTIME
    11import Lax895169.BitPredicate
    12import Lax895169.ArithmeticLogic
    13import Lax895169.BitLogic
    14import Lax895169.LogTimeMachines
    15
    16/-!
    17---
    18title: FO(≤, +, ×) = FO(≤, +, BIT)
    19type: theorem
    20---
    21A decision problem is AC⁰ definable, that is, definable in
    22FO(≤,+,×\le, +, \times), if and only if it is bit-definable, that is,
    23definable by a prenex sentence of FO(≤,+\le, +, BIT). One direction defines
    24the map i↦2ii \mapsto 2^i from addition and multiplication, by guessing a
    25doubling chain. The other defines multiplication from BIT, which rests on
    26the Bit Sum Lemma, counting the ones of a word of logarithmic length; the
    27product is then assembled from its columns with guessed carry chains. This
    28is the identification of the two vocabularies in Immerman's Descriptive
    29Complexity, Theorem 1.17.
    30-/
    31
    32namespace Lax895169.ACZeroIsBitLogic
    33
    34open FirstOrder FirstOrder.Language
    35open Lax904597.Problems Lax904597.Classes
    36open Lax485149.Complement Lax485149.FirstOrderDefinability Lax485149.DeterministicTransitiveClosure
    37open Lax485149.ClassNL Lax485149.ClassL
    38open Lax535992.LeastFixedPoint Lax535992.InflationaryFixedPoint Lax535992.ClassPTIME
    39open Lax895169.BitPredicate Lax895169.ArithmeticLogic Lax895169.BitLogic Lax895169.LogTimeMachines
    40
    41/-- Every AC⁰ definable problem is bit-definable. -/
    42axiom ac0Definable_bitDefinable : ∀ {L : Language.{0, 0}} [L.IsRelational] {P : DecisionProblem L},
    43 AC0Definable P → BitDefinable P
    44
    45/-- Every bit-definable problem is AC⁰ definable. -/
    46axiom bitDefinable_ac0Definable : ∀ {L : Language.{0, 0}} [L.IsRelational] {P : DecisionProblem L},
    47 BitDefinable P → AC0Definable P
    48
    49end Lax895169.ACZeroIsBitLogic
    50
    Show ProofShow Proof

    Discussion

    Ask a question or add context. Endorsements and structured flags are kept in the review panel above.

    Loading discussion…