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 The Immerman-Vardi theorem assumes linear orders on structures, but natural computational problems lack canonical orderings.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Linear orders are mathematical conveniences, not claims about physical reality; theorems using them remain valid for unordered domains.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
All finite structures can be effectively ordered without loss of generality; the theorem's results transfer to order-free formulations.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Canonical orderings (lexicographic on finite domains) exist constructively; the claim confuses practical unavailability with theoretical impossibility.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Real computational problems (databases, graphs, networks) have no inherent ordering; imposing one introduces artificial assumptions.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Order-dependent characterizations risk conflating logical expressiveness with arbitrary representational choices made during encoding.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Many natural problems (graph isomorphism, query evaluation) should be solvable without order; requiring it suggests theoretical incompleteness.
?
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.