6,030 research outputs found

    Depth, Highness and DNR degrees

    Get PDF
    We study Bennett deep sequences in the context of recursion theory; in particular we investigate the notions of O(1)-deepK, O(1)-deepC , order-deep K and order-deep C sequences. Our main results are that Martin-Loef random sets are not order-deepC , that every many-one degree contains a set which is not O(1)-deepC , that O(1)-deepC sets and order-deepK sets have high or DNR Turing degree and that no K-trival set is O(1)-deepK.Comment: journal version, dmtc

    Short course on principles and applications of beach nourishment

    Get PDF
    Covers the engineering aspects of beach nourishment. (Document is 192 pages

    Depth, Highness and DNR Degrees

    Get PDF
    A sequence is Bennett deep [5] if every recursive approximation of the Kolmogorov complexity of its initial segments from above satisfies that the difference between the approximation and the actual value of the Kolmogorov complexity of the initial segments dominates every constant function. We study for different lower bounds r of this difference between approximation and actual value of the initial segment complexity, which properties the corresponding r(n)-deep sets have. We prove that for r(n) = εn, depth coincides with highness on the Turing degrees. For smaller choices of r, i.e., r is any recursive order function, we show that depth implies either highness or diagonally-non-recursiveness (DNR). In particular, for left-r.e. sets, order depth already implies highness. As a corollary, we obtain that weakly-useful sets are either high or DNR. We prove that not all deep sets are high by constructing a low order-deep set. Bennett's depth is defined using prefix-free Kolmogorov complexity. We show that if one replaces prefix-free by plain Kolmogorov complexity in Bennett's depth definition, one obtains a notion which no longer satisfies the slow growth law (which stipulates that no shallow set truth-table computes a deep set); however, under this notion, random sets are not deep (at the unbounded recursive order magnitude). We improve Bennett's result that recursive sets are shallow by proving all K-trivial sets are shallow; our result is close to optimal. For Bennett's depth, the magnitude of compression improvement has to be achieved almost everywhere on the set. Bennett observed that relaxing to infinitely often is meaningless because every recursive set is infinitely often deep. We propose an alternative infinitely often depth notion that doesn't suffer this limitation (called i.o. depth).We show that every hyperimmune degree contains a i.o. deep set of magnitude εn, and construct a π01- class where every member is an i.o. deep set of magnitude εn. We prove that every non-recursive, non-DNR hyperimmune-free set is i.o. deep of constant magnitude, and that every nonrecursive many-one degree contains such a set

    Depth, Highness and DNR Degrees

    Get PDF
    A sequence is Bennett deep [5] if every recursive approximation of the Kolmogorov complexity of its initial segments from above satisfies that the difference between the approximation and the actual value of the Kolmogorov complexity of the initial segments dominates every constant function. We study for different lower bounds r of this difference between approximation and actual value of the initial segment complexity, which properties the corresponding r(n)-deep sets have. We prove that for r(n) = εn, depth coincides with highness on the Turing degrees. For smaller choices of r, i.e., r is any recursive order function, we show that depth implies either highness or diagonally-non-recursiveness (DNR). In particular, for left-r.e. sets, order depth already implies highness. As a corollary, we obtain that weakly-useful sets are either high or DNR. We prove that not all deep sets are high by constructing a low order-deep set. Bennett's depth is defined using prefix-free Kolmogorov complexity. We show that if one replaces prefix-free by plain Kolmogorov complexity in Bennett's depth definition, one obtains a notion which no longer satisfies the slow growth law (which stipulates that no shallow set truth-table computes a deep set); however, under this notion, random sets are not deep (at the unbounded recursive order magnitude). We improve Bennett's result that recursive sets are shallow by proving all K-trivial sets are shallow; our result is close to optimal. For Bennett's depth, the magnitude of compression improvement has to be achieved almost everywhere on the set. Bennett observed that relaxing to infinitely often is meaningless because every recursive set is infinitely often deep. We propose an alternative infinitely often depth notion that doesn't suffer this limitation (called i.o. depth).We show that every hyperimmune degree contains a i.o. deep set of magnitude εn, and construct a π01- class where every member is an i.o. deep set of magnitude εn. We prove that every non-recursive, non-DNR hyperimmune-free set is i.o. deep of constant magnitude, and that every nonrecursive many-one degree contains such a set

    Interstate 74 Quad Cities Corridor Study Scott County, Iowa and Rock Island County, Illinois Project Number IM-74-1(122)0-13-82 FHWA-IOWA-EIS-09-01-F, February 2009

    Get PDF
    The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Iowa and Illinois Departments of Transportation (Iowa DOT and IDOT) have identified the Selected Alternative for improving Interstate 74 (I-74) from its southern terminus at Avenue of the Cities (23rd Avenue) in Moline, Illinois to its northern terminus one mile north of the I-74 interchange with 53rd Street in Davenport, Iowa. The Selected Alternative identified and discussed in this Record of Decision is the preferred alternative identified in the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS). The purpose of the proposed improvements is to improve capacity, travel reliability, and safety along I-74 between its termini, and provide consistency with local land use planning goals. The need for the proposed improvements to the I-74 corridor is based on a combination of factors related to providing better transportation service and sustaining economic development

    Returning lost heritage: A study of the suitability of the Maple River for the re-introduction of Arctic grayling

    Full text link
    Rivers, Lakes, and WetlandsThe Arctic Grayling (Thymallus Arcticus) was once the dominant fish species in many watersheds of Michigan's northern Lower Peninsula, but were listed as extirpated in the 1930s following a long period of decline caused by overfishing, habitat destruction, and the introduction of non-native salmonids by anglers. Recent successes of conservation efforts in the Grayling's natural range in Montana has generated interest in re-stocking in some of the Michigan habitats of the Grayling. This study conducted tests to assess physical and biological factors such as macroinvertebrate population, substrata, and temperature. This study found that the East Branch of the Maple River is not suitable for Arctic Grayling, but that the West Branch might support populations of the Grayling, and would be worth studying in more detail with regards to possible re-stocking.https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/143562/1/McGinnis_2017.pd

    Arithmetic complexity via effective names for random sequences

    Full text link
    We investigate enumerability properties for classes of sets which permit recursive, lexicographically increasing approximations, or left-r.e. sets. In addition to pinpointing the complexity of left-r.e. Martin-L\"{o}f, computably, Schnorr, and Kurtz random sets, weakly 1-generics and their complementary classes, we find that there exist characterizations of the third and fourth levels of the arithmetic hierarchy purely in terms of these notions. More generally, there exists an equivalence between arithmetic complexity and existence of numberings for classes of left-r.e. sets with shift-persistent elements. While some classes (such as Martin-L\"{o}f randoms and Kurtz non-randoms) have left-r.e. numberings, there is no canonical, or acceptable, left-r.e. numbering for any class of left-r.e. randoms. Finally, we note some fundamental differences between left-r.e. numberings for sets and reals
    corecore