Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    K is many-one complete among the c.e. sets — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Truth & Knowledge
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→K is Turing complete among the computably enumerable sets

    K is many-one complete among the c.e. sets

    Proof of definition segmentsTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Truth & KnowledgeProof of definition segments

    Connections

    2 topics

    All sources support it1 linked

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Truth & Knowledge
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    Modality & Possibility
    1 linked

    Related

    K is Turing complete among the computably enumerable setsMany-one reducibility implies Turing reducibilityTherefore any c.e. set is Turing reducible to K

    Similar

    K is Turing complete among the computably enumerable sets79%Therefore any c.e. set is Turing reducible to K79%Strong completeness (if Γ ⊨ φ then Γ ⊢ φ) holds for many-sorted logic.73%Proposition 3.5 states that if a set A is reducible to a computable (o...72%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: recursive-functions
    View source passageHide passage
    It is easy to see that \(A \leq_m B\) implies \(A \leq_T B\). (For if \(f(x)\) is a \(m\)-reduction of \(A\) to \(B\), then consider the program which first computes \(f(n)\) and then, using \(B\) an as oracle, checks if \(f(n) \in B\), outputting 1 if so and 0 if not.) It thus follows that \(K\) is also Turing complete—i.e., it embodies the maximum “degree of unsolvability” among the the c.e. sets when this notion is understood in terms of Turing reducibility as well as many-one reducibility.

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective