Analysis in weak systems

The authors survey and comment their work on weak analysis. They describe the basic set-up of analysis in a feasible second-order theory and consider the impact of adding to it various forms of weak Konig's lemma. A brief discussion of the Baire categoricity theorem follows. It is then considered a strengthening of feasibility obtained (fundamentally) by the addition of a counting axiom and showed how it is possible to develop Riemann integration in the stronger system. The paper finishes with three questions in weak analysis.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Big in Reverse Mathematics: measure and category

The smooth development of large parts of mathematics hinges on the idea that some sets are `small' or `negligible' and can therefore be ignored for a given purpose. The perhaps most famous smallness notion, namely `measure zero', originated with Lebesgue, while a second smallness notion, namely `meagre' or `first category', originated with Baire around the same time. The associated Baire category theorem is a central result governing the properties of meagre (and related) sets, while the same holds for Tao's pigeonhole principle for measure spaes and measure zero sets. In this paper, we study these theorems in Kohlenbach's higher-order Reverse Mathematics, identifying a considerable number of equivalent theorems. The latter involve most basic properties of semi-continuous and pointwise discontinuous functions, Blumberg's theorem, Riemann integration, and Volterra's early work circa 1881. All the aforementioned theorems fall (far) outside of the Big Five of Reverse Mathematics, and we investigate natural restrictions like Baire 1 and quasi-continuity that make these theorems provable again in the Big Five (or similar). Finally, despite the fundamental differences between measure and category, the proofs of our equivalences turn out to be similar.Comment: 32 pages plus Technical Appendix. Same technical appendix as: arXiv:2208.0302

Effective Choice and Boundedness Principles in Computable Analysis

In this paper we study a new approach to classify mathematical theorems according to their computational content. Basically, we are asking the question which theorems can be continuously or computably transferred into each other? For this purpose theorems are considered via their realizers which are operations with certain input and output data. The technical tool to express continuous or computable relations between such operations is Weihrauch reducibility and the partially ordered degree structure induced by it. We have identified certain choice principles which are cornerstones among Weihrauch degrees and it turns out that certain core theorems in analysis can be classified naturally in this structure. In particular, we study theorems such as the Intermediate Value Theorem, the Baire Category Theorem, the Banach Inverse Mapping Theorem and others. We also explore how existing classifications of the Hahn-Banach Theorem and Weak K"onig's Lemma fit into this picture. We compare the results of our classification with existing classifications in constructive and reverse mathematics and we claim that in a certain sense our classification is finer and sheds some new light on the computational content of the respective theorems. We develop a number of separation techniques based on a new parallelization principle, on certain invariance properties of Weihrauch reducibility, on the Low Basis Theorem of Jockusch and Soare and based on the Baire Category Theorem. Finally, we present a number of metatheorems that allow to derive upper bounds for the classification of the Weihrauch degree of many theorems and we discuss the Brouwer Fixed Point Theorem as an example

The descriptive theory of represented spaces

This is a survey on the ongoing development of a descriptive theory of represented spaces, which is intended as an extension of both classical and effective descriptive set theory to deal with both sets and functions between represented spaces. Most material is from work-in-progress, and thus there may be a stronger focus on projects involving the author than an objective survey would merit.Comment: survey of work-in-progres

On the alleged simplicity of impure proof

Roughly, a proof of a theorem, is “pure” if it draws only on what is “close” or “intrinsic” to that theorem. Mathematicians employ a variety of terms to identify pure proofs, saying that a pure proof is one that avoids what is “extrinsic,” “extraneous,” “distant,” “remote,” “alien,” or “foreign” to the problem or theorem under investigation. In the background of these attributions is the view that there is a distance measure (or a variety of such measures) between mathematical statements and proofs. Mathematicians have paid little attention to specifying such distance measures precisely because in practice certain methods of proof have seemed self- evidently impure by design: think for instance of analytic geometry and analytic number theory. By contrast, mathematicians have paid considerable attention to whether such impurities are a good thing or to be avoided, and some have claimed that they are valuable because generally impure proofs are simpler than pure proofs. This article is an investigation of this claim, formulated more precisely by proof- theoretic means. After assembling evidence from proof theory that may be thought to support this claim, we will argue that on the contrary this evidence does not support the claim

Computational reverse mathematics and foundational analysis

Reverse mathematics studies which subsystems of second order arithmetic are equivalent to key theorems of ordinary, non-set-theoretic mathematics. The main philosophical application of reverse mathematics proposed thus far is foundational analysis, which explores the limits of different foundations for mathematics in a formally precise manner. This paper gives a detailed account of the motivations and methodology of foundational analysis, which have heretofore been largely left implicit in the practice. It then shows how this account can be fruitfully applied in the evaluation of major foundational approaches by a careful examination of two case studies: a partial realization of Hilbert's program due to Simpson [1988], and predicativism in the extended form due to Feferman and Sch\"{u}tte. Shore [2010, 2013] proposes that equivalences in reverse mathematics be proved in the same way as inequivalences, namely by considering only $\omega$-models of the systems in question. Shore refers to this approach as computational reverse mathematics. This paper shows that despite some attractive features, computational reverse mathematics is inappropriate for foundational analysis, for two major reasons. Firstly, the computable entailment relation employed in computational reverse mathematics does not preserve justification for the foundational programs above. Secondly, computable entailment is a $\Pi^1_1$ complete relation, and hence employing it commits one to theoretical resources which outstrip those available within any foundational approach that is proof-theoretically weaker than $\Pi^1_1\text{-}\mathsf{CA}_0$.Comment: Submitted. 41 page