2
$\begingroup$

Choose a random oracle $f : \{0,1\}^\ast \to \{0,1\}$, and define the logic $ZFC^f$ by adding a fresh symbol $g$, an axiom that $g$ has the correct type, and one axiom $g(s) = f(s)$ for each $s \in \{0,1\}^\ast$. This is a countably infinite set of axioms since $f$ is not a symbol in $ZFC^f$.

Within $ZFC^f$ we can define $g$-oracle Turing machines in the standard way, for example by using a second tape for the input to $g$ and letting the machine branch on the value of $g$ on the second tape. We then have the complexity classes $P^g$, $NP^g$, etc. Since $f$ was chosen at random in the metalogic, $P^g \ne NP^g$ is true with probability 1.

Question 1: Is $P^g = NP^g$ independent over $ZFC^f$?

The proof seems immediate: any finite proof in $ZFC^f$ can interrogate at most finitely many values of $g$. However, I am not confident the definitions are sensible.

Question 2: Is there a good reference exploring this type of logic + random oracle construction?

$\endgroup$
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ This will not do what you presumably intend. Any proof may include only finitely many axioms, hence it may only use information on a finite part of the oracle. In particular, it makes no difference whatsoever if you choose the oracle randomly or otherwise. Since interesting properties are invariant under a finite change in the oracle anyway, you may as well omit the $g(s)=\dots$ axioms entirely. $\endgroup$ – Emil Jeřábek supports Monica Mar 5 '18 at 8:08
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ For what its worth, relativization by means of adding an extra symbol in the language (with no specific axioms) is used extensibly in bounded arithmetic. $\endgroup$ – Emil Jeřábek supports Monica Mar 5 '18 at 8:11
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ For example, $P^g=BPP^g$ is still independent of $ZFC^g$, even though for a random oracle $f$, $P^f=BPP^f$ holds with probability 1. $\endgroup$ – Emil Jeřábek supports Monica Mar 5 '18 at 10:06
5
$\begingroup$

Yes on Question 1 (assuming ZFC is consistent). You don't need $f$ to be random exactly, any $f$ will do. And for the proof you need to also use the fact that there is an oracle $h$ with NP$^h=$P$^h$.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.