Undergrad Is the Inverse Image of a Computable Function Recursively Enumerable?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bedrich
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Set Set theory
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on whether the inverse image of a computable function is recursively enumerable (RE). It highlights that if the inverse function is computable, then the set ƒ-1(A) will also be RE. However, if the inverse is not computable, ƒ-1(A) will not be RE. An example provided is the function f(x) = x + 1, which demonstrates that its inverse can be enumerated, thus confirming its RE status. The conversation emphasizes the importance of computability in determining the properties of these sets.
Bedrich
Messages
6
Reaction score
1
Hello, I am stuck on deciding if given sets are recursive or recursively enumerable and why. Those sets are:
set ƒ(A) = {y, ∃ x ∈ A ƒ(x) = y}
and the second is
set ƒ-1(A) = {x, ƒ(x) ∈ A}
where A is a recursive set and ƒ : ℕ → ℕ is a computable function.

I am new to computability theory and any advice would be highly appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
They can both be recursively enumerable, for instance if ##f^{-1}## is a computable function (note that, strictly speaking, ##f^{-1}## is a function from N to the power set of N, ie the set of subsets of N). Examples are the functions that deliver result ##\max(0,x-1), x+1, x## and ##0##.

But if ##f^{-1}## is not computable, the second set will not be RE. Do all functions from N to N have computable inverses?
 
  • Like
Likes berkeman
andrewkirk said:
They can both be recursively enumerable, for instance if ##f^{-1}## is a computable function (note that, strictly speaking, ##f^{-1}## is a function from N to the power set of N, ie the set of subsets of N). Examples are the functions that deliver result ##\max(0,x-1), x+1, x## and ##0##.

But if ##f^{-1}## is not computable, the second set will not be RE. Do all functions from N to N have computable inverses?
Thank you for your answer. Can you please clarify the examples of functions. I can't really imagine how they could prove that ƒ-1 is recursively enumerable. There is nothing said about that functions from ℕ → ℕ have computable inverses.
 
Bedrich said:
Thank you for your answer. Can you please clarify the examples of functions. I can't really imagine how they could prove that ƒ-1 is recursively enumerable. There is nothing said about that functions from ℕ → ℕ have computable inverses.
Having a computable inverse is the same as the image of the inverse being RE.

Consider the function ##f:\mathbb N\to\mathbb N## such that ##f(x)=x+1##. The inverse function is ##f^{-1}:\mathbb N\to 2^\mathbb N## such that ##f^{-1}(x)=\{x-1\}## if ##x>0##, and ##f^{-1}(0)=\{0\}##.

The image of function ##f^{-1}## is ##S=\{\{x\}\ :\ x\in \mathbb N\}##. This is recursively enumerable if there exists an algorithm that enumerates the members of ##S##. Such an algorithm is:

x:=0;
while TRUE do
print(cat("{",x,"}"));
x := x+1;
end;​

where 'cat' is the string concatenation function.

Hence ##S## is RE.
 
The standard _A " operator" maps a Null Hypothesis Ho into a decision set { Do not reject:=1 and reject :=0}. In this sense ( HA)_A , makes no sense. Since H0, HA aren't exhaustive, can we find an alternative operator, _A' , so that ( H_A)_A' makes sense? Isn't Pearson Neyman related to this? Hope I'm making sense. Edit: I was motivated by a superficial similarity of the idea with double transposition of matrices M, with ## (M^{T})^{T}=M##, and just wanted to see if it made sense to talk...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K