Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Order-invariant definability in FO(LFP) diverges from ordered FO(LFP) definability, making the logical capture of P order-sensitive.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Order-invariant and ordered FO(LFP) may capture identical problems; divergence in definability doesn't entail divergence in expressive power.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
The practical relevance of order-invariance is unclear—real computation doesn't privilege order-independent definitions over order-dependent ones.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Order-invariant definability requires properties invariant across all orderings, a strictly stronger constraint than ordered definability.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
P-completeness results depend on specific orderings; absent order-invariance, FO(LFP) captures only order-dependent fragments of P.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
This divergence reveals that canonical logical characterizations of P require order structure, supporting order-sensitivity of computational complexity.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Strongest counterpoint
Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.