4.2 Article

Actions of tame abelian product groups

期刊

JOURNAL OF MATHEMATICAL LOGIC
卷 23, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

WORLD SCIENTIFIC PUBL CO PTE LTD
DOI: 10.1142/S0219061322500283

关键词

Borel reducibility; Abelian Polish groups; Orbit equivalence relations; Potential complexity; Symmetric models; Axiom of choice

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A Polish group G is considered tame if the corresponding orbit equivalence relation is Borel under any continuous action of G. Solecki provided a characterization for when G is tame, for the case when G = Pi(n)gamma(n) where gamma(n) is a countable abelian group. Ding and Gao showed that the orbit equivalence relation for such G must be potentially Pi(0)(6), conjecturing that the optimal bound could be Pi(0)(3).
A Polish group G is tame if for any continuous action of G, the corresponding orbit equivalence relation is Borel. When G = Pi(n)gamma(n) for countable abelian gamma(n), Solecki [Equivalence relations induced by actions of Polish groups, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 347 (1995) 4765-4777] gave a characterization for when G is tame. In [L. Ding and S. Gao, Nonarchimedean abelian Polish groups and their actions, Adv. Math. 307 (2017) 312-343], Ding and Gao showed that for such G, the orbit equivalence relation must in fact be potentially Pi(0)(6), while conjecturing that the optimal bound could be Pi(0)(3). We show that the optimal bound is D(Pi(0)(5)) by constructing an action of such a group G which is not potentially Pi(0)(5), and show how to modify the analysis of [L. Ding and S. Gao, Nonarchimedean abelian Polish groups and their actions, Adv. Math. 307 (2017) 312-343] to get this slightly better upper bound. It follows, using the results of Hjorth et al. [Borel equivalence relations induced by actions of the symmetric group, Ann. Pure Appl. Logic 92 (1998) 63-112], that this is the optimal bound for the potential complexity of actions of tame abelian product groups. Our lower-bound analysis involves forcing over models of set theory where choice fails for sequences of finite sets.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据