On Kim-independence in NSOP 1 theories Itay Kaplan, HUJI Joint - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

On Kim-independence in NSOP 1 theories Itay Kaplan, HUJI Joint works with Nick Ramsey, Nick Ramsey and Saharon Shelah 06/07/2017, Model Theory, Będlewo, Poland

NSOP 1 Definition The formula ϕ ( x ; y ) has SOP 1 if there is a collection of tuples � a η | η ∈ 2 <ω � so that � � ◮ For all η ∈ 2 ω , ϕ ( x , a η | α ) | α < ω is consistent. ◮ For all η ∈ 2 <ω , if ν � η ⌢ � 0 � , then { ϕ ( x , a ν ) , ϕ ( x , a η⌢ � 1 � ) } is inconsistent. T is NSOP 1 if no formula in it has SOP 1 . 2/20 Illustrative diagram

Alternative definition The following definition seems more accessible. Definition The formula ϕ ( x ; y ) has an SOP 1 array if there is a collection of pairs � c i , d i | i < ω � and some k < ω so that ◮ � ϕ ( x , c i ) | i < ω � is consistent. ◮ � ϕ ( x , d i ) | i < ω � is k -inconsistent. ◮ c i ≡ c , d < i d i for all i < ω . Fact T is NSOP 1 iff no formula ϕ ( x , y ) has an SOP 1 -array. 3/20

The place of NSOP 1 in the universe Every simple theory is NSOP 1 , and every NSOP 1 theory is NTP 1 , as illustrated in Gabe Conant’s beautiful diagram A map of the universe 4/20

SOP 1 was defined by Džamonja and Shelah (2004), and was later studied by Usvyatsov and Shelah where a first example of a non-simple NSOP 1 was introduced* (2008). More recently, in their paper “on model-theoretic tree properties” (2016), Chernikov and Ramsey provided more information. They proved a version of the Kim-Pillay characterization for NSOP 1 . Namely, if there is an independence relation satisfying certain properties, then the theory is NSOP 1 . This characterization can be used to provide many natural examples of NSOP 1 -theories. 5/20

The Chernikov-Ramsey characterization Theorem (Chernkiov-Ramsey) Assume there is an Aut( C ) -invariant ternary relation | ⌣ on small subsets of the monster which satisfies the following properties, for an arbitrary M | = T and arbitrary tuples from C . ◮ Strong finite character: if a � | ⌣ M b, then there is a formula ϕ ( x , b , m ) ∈ tp ( a / bM ) such that for any a ′ | = ϕ ( x , b , m ) , a ′ � | ⌣ M b. ◮ Existence over models: M | = T implies a | ⌣ M M for any a. ◮ Monotonicity: aa ′ | ⌣ M bb ′ = ⇒ a | ⌣ M b. ◮ Symmetry: a | ⌣ M b ⇐ ⇒ b | ⌣ M a. ⌣ M b, a ′ | ◮ The independence theorem: a | ⌣ M c, b | ⌣ M c and a ≡ M a ′ implies there is a ′′ with a ′′ ≡ Mb a, a ′′ ≡ Mc a ′ and a ′′ | ⌣ M bc. Then T is NSOP 1 . 6/20

Examples of NSOP 1 theories Here are some examples of non-simple NSOP 1 that were studied recently. 1. (Ramsey) The selector function: the model companion of the following theory. Two sorts, F and O . E is an equivalence relation on O , eval : F × O → O is a function such that eval ( f , o ) E o and if o 1 E o 2 then eval ( f , o 1 ) = eval ( f , o 2 ). 2. (Chernikov, Ramsey) Parametrized simple theory ( T simple and is a Fraïssé limit of a universal class of finite relational language with no algebraicity, then add a new sort for generic copies of models of T ). 3. (Chernikov, Ramsey) ω -free PAC fields (i.e., PAC fields with Galois group ˆ F ω , the free profinite group with ℵ 0 -generators. (Was extended to general Frobenius fields, essentially the same proof.) 7/20

Examples of NSOP 1 theories 4 (Kruckman, Ramsey) If T is a model complete NSOP 1 theory eliminating the quantifier ∃ ∞ , then the generic expansion of T by arbitrary constant, function, and relation symbols is still NSOP 1 . (Exists by a Theorem of Winkler, 1975.) 5. (Kruckman, Ramsey) With the same assumption, T can be extended to an NSOP 1 -theory with Skolem functions. 6. (Chernikov, Ramsey) Vector spaces with a generic bilinear form (exist by Granger). 7. (d’Elbée, ...) Algebraically closed field of positive char. with a generic additive subgroup. 8/20

Kim independence To complete the picture, it is natural to try and find an independence relation satisfying the criterion of Chernikov-Ramsey. Definition We say that ϕ ( x , b ) Kim-divides over a model M if there is a global M -invariant type q ⊇ tp ( b / M ) such that { ϕ ( x , a i ) | i < ω } is inconsistent when � a i | i < ω � is a Morley sequence in q over M . In other words, this is saying that ϕ ( x , b ) divides but that moreover the sequence witnessing dividing is a Morley sequence generated by an invariant type ( a 0 | = q | M , a 1 | = q | Ma 0 , etc.). This notion was suggested by Kim in his Banff talk in 2009, and is also related to Hrushovski’s q-dividing and Shelah and Malliaris’ higher formula . Definition We say that ϕ ( x , b ) Kim-forks over M if it implies a finite disjunction of Kim-dividing formulas. 9/20

Kim’s Lemma for Kim independence Lemma (NSOP 1 ) If ϕ ( x , b ) Kim-divides and q is any global invariant type containing tp ( b / M ) , then { ϕ ( x , a i ) | i < ω } is inconsistent where � a i | i < ω � is a Morley sequence generated by q. Corollary (NSOP 1 ) If ϕ ( x , b ) Kim-forks over M then it Kim-divides over M. However, this is not true for forking. Proof. By the alternative definition of NSOP 1 using SOP 1 arrays. Definition K Write a | M b for tp ( a / Mb ) does not Kim-divide over M . ⌣ 10/20

Properties of Kim independence Theorem (NSOP 1 ) Kim-independence satisfies all the properties listed in the Ramsey-Chernikov criterion. K ◮ Strong finite character: if a � | M b, then there is a formula ⌣ ϕ ( x , b , m ) ∈ tp ( a / bM ) such that for any a ′ | = ϕ ( x , b , m ) , a ′ � | K M b. ⌣ K ◮ Existence over models: M | = T implies a | M M for any a. ⌣ ◮ Monotonicity: aa ′ | M bb ′ = K K ⇒ a | M b. ⌣ ⌣ K K ◮ Symmetry: a | M b ⇐ ⇒ b | M a. ⌣ ⌣ M b, a ′ | K K K ◮ The independence theorem: a | M c, b | M c and ⌣ ⌣ ⌣ a ≡ M a ′ implies there is a ′′ with a ′′ ≡ Mb a, a ′′ ≡ Mc a ′ and a ′′ | K M bc. ⌣ 11/20

Tree Morley sequences The main tool in the proofs of all the nontrivial properties (symmetry and the independence theorem) was tree Morley sequences. These are sequences which are indexed by an infinite tree. They play a similar role to Morley sequences in simple theories. They can be defined to be of any height, but let me define the trees of height ω . Definition Let T ω be the set of functions f : [ n , ω ) → ω with finite support . We put a tree order T ω by f � g iff f ⊆ g . We let f ∧ g = f ↾ m where m = min { n < ω | f ↾ [ m , ω ) = g ↾ [ m , ω ) } . The n ’th level of the tree is the set P n = { f | dom ( f ) = [ n , ω ) } . We put a lexicographical order by f < lex g iff f � g or f ∧ g ∈ P n +1 and f ( n ) < g ( n ). Let ζ n be the zero function with domain [ n , ω ). 12/20

An illustration of T ω 13/20

Tree Morley sequences Definition � a η | η ∈ T ω � is called a Morley tree over M if: 1. It is indiscernible with respect to the language { � , < lex , ∧ , ≤ len } where f ≤ len g iff f is lower than g in the tree. 2. For every n < ω , there is some global invariant type q over M � � such that a ≥ ζ n +1 � � i � | i < ω is a Morley sequence generated by q . Definition A sequence � a n | n < ω � is a Tree Morley sequence if there is a Morley tree as above such that a n = a ζ n for all n . Remark: to construct tree Morley sequences in practice, one usually constructs a very tall tree, and then extract using Erdös-Rado. 14/20

Tree Morley sequences Theorem (NSOP 1 ) 1. If � a i | i < ω � is a tree Morley sequence over M. Then ϕ ( x , a 0 ) Kim-divides over M iff { ϕ ( x , a i ) | i < ω } is inconsistent. 2. If � a i | i < ω � is a universal witness for Kim-dividing (if ϕ ( x ; a < n ) Kim-divides over M then the sequence of n-tuples from � a i | i < ω � witness this), then � a i | i < ω � is a Tree Morley sequence. K 3. Tree Morley sequences exists: if a | M b and a ≡ M b then ⌣ there is a tree Morley sequence starting with a , b. 4. If � a i | i < ω � is a Morley sequence over M (i.e., an f indiscernible sequence such that a i | M a < i ), then � a i | i < ω � ⌣ is a tree Morley sequence, and in particular witnesses Kim-dividing. 15/20

Kim-independence and simple theories Theorem TFAE for an NSOP 1 -theory T: 1. T is simple. K = | f over models. 2. | ⌣ ⌣ K satisfies base monotonicity over models. 3. | ⌣ In particular we get a new proof of a (stronger result of Shelah that NTP 2 +NTP 1 =Simple). Corollary If T is NSOP 1 and NTP 2 , then T is simple. Proof. It is known that in NTP 2 , if ϕ ( x , b ) divides over M then it Kim-divides over M . K K Note: Transitivity fails. It is possible that ab | M c , a | M b but ⌣ ⌣ K a � | M bc . ⌣ 16/20

Local character In my work with Ramsey, we proved a version of local character. Theorem (NSOP 1 ) If p ∈ S ( M ) then there is some N ≺ M of size ≤ 2 | T | over which p does not Kim-fork. In joint work with Shelah we were able to considerably improve this theorem. 17/20