arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2210.07527

Conant-independence and generalized free amalgamation

Scott Mutchnik
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

We initiate the study of a generalization of Kim-independence, Conant-independence, based on the "strong Kim-dividing" of Kaplan, Ramsey and Shelah. We introduce an axiom on stationary independence relations essentially generalizing the "freedom" axiom in some of the free amalgamation theories of Conant, and show that this axiom provides the correct setting for carrying out arguments of Chernikov, Kaplan and Ramsey on $\mathrm{NSOP}_{1}$ theories relative to a stationary independence relation. Generalizing Conant's results on free amalgamation to the limits of our knowledge of the $\mathrm{NSOP}_{n}$ hierarchy, we show using methods from Conant as well as our previous work that any theory where the equivalent conditions of this local variant of $\mathrm{NSOP}_{1}$ holds is either $\mathrm{NSOP}_{1}$ or $\mathrm{SOP}_{3}$ and is either simple or $\mathrm{TP}_{2}$, and observe that these theories give an interesting class of examples of theories where Conant-independence is symmetric, including all of Conant's examples, the small cycle-free random graphs of Shelah and the (finite-language) $\omega$-categorical Hrushovski constructions of Evans and Wong. We then answer a question of Conant, showing that the generic functional structures of Conant and Kruckman are examples of non-modular free amalgamation theories, and show that any free amalgamation theory is $\mathrm{NSOP}_{1}$ or $\mathrm{SOP}_{3}$, while an $\mathrm{NSOP}_{1}$ free amalgamation theory is simple if and only if it is modular. Finally, we show that every theory where Conant-independence is symmetric is $\mathrm{NSOP}_{4}$. Therefore, symmetry for Conant-independence gives the next known neostability-theoretic dividing line on the $\mathrm{NSOP}_{n}$ hierarchy beyond $\mathrm{NSOP}_{1}$. We explain the connection to some established open questions.

Explore related subjects

math.LO

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Scott Mutchnik. 2022-10-14. Conant-independence and generalized free amalgamation. https://arxiv.org/abs/2210.07527

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

There is no maximal $K$-degree

The Kolmogorov complexity of a string characterize how complex it is to describe the string. If every prefix of a real $x$ is more complex to describe than every prefix (of the same length) of real $y$, then it is seen as $x$ is more complex to describe than $y$. It is wondered if there is a real $x$ so that no other reals are strictly more complex (to describe) than $x$. The behavior of Kolmogorov complexity functions generated by reals (namely $n\mapsto$ the minimal description length of the real) is quite chaos. Therefore, it is widely believed that there are many reals that are maximally complex to describe. For instance, it is conjectured that all random enough reals have maximal $K$-degree. In this paper, it is shown that there is no real with maximal $K$-degree. Actually, for almost all real $x$, we can uniformly computably find another real whose $K$-degree is strictly above $x$.

math.LO↗
arXiv2026

Quadruples and cubes

We prove, in $\mathsf{ZFC}$, that the $\lambda$-terraced cube relation fails whenever $\lambda$ is an uncountable cardinal. The corresponding terraced relation for quadruples fails for every $\lambda$. If $\lambda$ is $\aleph_0$ then the pretinent terraced relation has consistency strength of at least one Woodin cardinal. We prove positive polarized relations at a successor and a double successor from wondrous ideals. We show, however, that there are no such ideals over two consecutive cardinals simultaneously.

math.LO↗
arXiv2026

Possibilistic Logic over a Logic of Formal Inconsistency

In this article, we have introduced a new possibilistic logic on a logic of formal inconsistency with the aim of developing a possibility theoretic framework to deal with uncertainty and inconsistency meaningfully without leading to a system collapse. We have discussed the syntax and semantics for this logic and have proved the soundness and completeness theorems. A set of new measures of consistency, contradictoriness, and triviality of a set of formulas have been defined. These have then been put to use in an example to show that this framework can provide better means of machine reasoning.

math.LO↗