Tame abstract elementary class
In model theory, a discipline within the field of mathematical logic, a tame abstract elementary class is an abstract elementary class (AEC) which satisfies a locality property for types called tameness. Even though it appears implicitly in earlier work of Shelah, tameness as a property of AEC was first isolated by Grossberg and VanDieren,[1] who observed that tame AECs were much easier to handle than general AECs.
Definition
[edit | edit source]Let K be an AEC with joint embedding, amalgamation, and no maximal models. Just like in first-order model theory, this implies K has a universal model-homogeneous monster model . Working inside , we can define a semantic notion of types by specifying that two elements a and b have the same type over some base model if there is an automorphism of the monster model sending a to b fixing pointwise (note that types can be defined in a similar manner without using a monster model[2]). Such types are called Galois types.
One can ask for such types to be determined by their restriction on a small domain. This gives rise to the notion of tameness:
- An AEC is tame if there exists a cardinal such that any two distinct Galois types are already distinct on a submodel of their domain of size . When we want to emphasize , we say is -tame.
Tame AECs are usually also assumed to satisfy amalgamation.
Discussion and motivation
[edit | edit source]While (without the existence of large cardinals) there are examples of non-tame AECs,[3] most of the known natural examples are tame.[4] In addition, the following sufficient conditions for a class to be tame are known:
- Tameness is a large cardinal axiom:[5] There are class-many almost strongly compact cardinals if and only if any abstract elementary class is tame.
- Some tameness follows from categoricity:[6] If an AEC with amalgamation is categorical in a cardinal of high-enough cofinality, then tameness holds for types over saturated models of size less than .
- Conjecture 1.5 in [7]: If K is categorical in some λ ≥ Hanf(K) then there exists χ < Hanf(K) such that K is χ-tame.
Many results in the model theory of (general) AECs assume weak forms of the Generalized continuum hypothesis and rely on sophisticated combinatorial set-theoretic arguments.[8] On the other hand, the model theory of tame AECs is much easier to develop, as evidenced by the results presented below.
Results
[edit | edit source]The following are some important results about tame AECs.
- Upward categoricity transfer:[9] A -tame AEC with amalgamation that is categorical in some successor (i.e. has exactly one model of size up to isomorphism) is categorical in all .
- Upward stability transfer:[10] A -tame AEC with amalgamation that is stable in a cardinal is stable in and in every infinite such that .
- Tameness can be seen as a topological separation principle:[11] An AEC with amalgamation is tame if and only if an appropriate topology on the set of Galois types is Hausdorff.
- Tameness and categoricity imply there is a forking notion:[12] A -tame AEC with amalgamation that is categorical in a cardinal of cofinality greater than or equal to has a good frame: a forking-like notion for types of singletons (in particular, it is stable in all cardinals). This gives rise to a well-behaved notion of dimension.
Notes
[edit | edit source]- ^ Grossberg & VanDieren 2006a.
- ^ Shelah 2009, Definition II.1.9.
- ^ Baldwin & Shelah 2008.
- ^ See the discussion in the introduction of Grossberg & VanDieren 2006a.
- ^ Boney 2014, Theorem 1.3.
- ^ Shelah 1999, Main claim 2.3 (9.2 in the online version).
- ^ Grossberg & VanDieren 2006b.
- ^ See for example many of the hard theorems of Shelah's book (Shelah 2009).
- ^ Grossberg & VanDieren 2006b.
- ^ See Baldwin, Kueker & VanDieren 2006, Theorem 4.5 for the first result and Grossberg & VanDieren 2006a for the second.
- ^ Lieberman 2011, Proposition 4.1.
- ^ See Vasey 2014 for the first result, and Boney & Vasey 2014, Corollary 6.10.5 for the result on dimension.
References
[edit | edit source]- Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2172: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
- Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2172: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
- Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2172: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
- Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2172: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
- Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2172: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
- Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2172: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
- Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2172: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
- Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2172: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
- Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2172: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
- Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2172: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
- Boney, Will; Unger Spencer (2015), "Large Cardinal Axioms from Tameness in AECs" arXiv:1509.01191v2.
- Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2172: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
- Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2172: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).