Jump to content

Kruskal's tree theorem

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from TREE(3))

In mathematics, Kruskal's tree theorem states that the set of finite trees over a well-quasi-ordered set of labels is itself well-quasi-ordered under homeomorphic embedding.

A finitary application of the theorem gives the existence of the fast-growing TREE function. TREE(3) is largely accepted to be one of the largest simply defined finite numbers, dwarfing other large numbers such as Graham's number and googolplex.[1]

History

[edit]

The theorem was conjectured by Andrew Vázsonyi and proved by Joseph Kruskal (1960); a short proof was given by Crispin Nash-Williams (1963). It has since become a prominent example in reverse mathematics as a statement that cannot be proved in ATR0 (a second-order arithmetic theory with a form of arithmetical transfinite recursion).

In 2004, the result was generalized from trees to graphs as the Robertson–Seymour theorem, a result that has also proved important in reverse mathematics and leads to the even-faster-growing SSCG function, which dwarfs .

Statement

[edit]

The version given here is that proven by Nash-Williams; Kruskal's formulation is somewhat stronger. All trees we consider are finite.

Given a tree T with a root, and given vertices v, w, call w a successor of v if the unique path from the root to w contains v, and call w an immediate successor of v if additionally the path from v to w contains no other vertex.

Take X to be a partially ordered set. If T1, T2 are rooted trees with vertices labeled in X, we say that T1 is inf-embeddable in T2 and write if there is an injective map F from the vertices of T1 to the vertices of T2 such that:

  • For all vertices v of T1, the label of v precedes the label of ;
  • If w is any successor of v in T1, then is a successor of ; and
  • If w1, w2 are any two distinct immediate successors of v, then the path from to in T2 contains .

Kruskal's tree theorem then states:

If X is well-quasi-ordered, then the set of rooted trees with labels in X is well-quasi-ordered under the inf-embeddable order defined above. (That is to say, given any infinite sequence T1, T2, … of rooted trees labeled in X, there is some so that .)

Friedman's work

[edit]

For a countable label set X, Kruskal's tree theorem can be expressed and proven using second-order arithmetic. However, like Goodstein's theorem or the Paris–Harrington theorem, some special cases and variants of the theorem can be expressed in subsystems of second-order arithmetic much weaker than the subsystems where they can be proved. This was first observed by Harvey Friedman in the early 1980s, an early success of the then-nascent field of reverse mathematics. In the case where the trees above are taken to be unlabeled (that is, in the case where X has size one), Friedman found that the result was unprovable in ATR0,[2] thus giving the first example of a predicative result with a provably impredicative proof.[3] This case of the theorem is still provable by Π1
1
-CA0, but by adding a "gap condition"[4] to the definition of the order on trees above, he found a natural variation of the theorem unprovable in this system.[5][6] Much later, the Robertson–Seymour theorem would give another theorem unprovable by Π1
1
-CA0.

Ordinal analysis confirms the strength of Kruskal's theorem, with the proof-theoretic ordinal of the theorem equaling the small Veblen ordinal (sometimes confused with the smaller Ackermann ordinal).[7]

Weak tree function

[edit]

Suppose that is the statement:

There is some m such that if T1, ..., Tm is a finite sequence of unlabeled rooted trees where Ti has vertices, then for some .

All the statements are true as a consequence of Kruskal's theorem and Kőnig's lemma. For each n, Peano arithmetic can prove that is true, but Peano arithmetic cannot prove the statement " is true for all n".[8] Moreover, the length of the shortest proof of in Peano arithmetic grows phenomenally fast as a function of n, far faster than any primitive recursive function or the Ackermann function, for example.[citation needed] The least m for which holds similarly grows extremely quickly with n.

TREE function

[edit]
Sequence of trees where each node is colored either green, red, blue
A sequence of rooted trees labelled from a set of 3 labels (blue < red < green). The nth tree in the sequence contains at most n vertices, and no tree is inf-embeddable within any later tree in the sequence. TREE(3) is defined to be the longest possible length of such a sequence.

By incorporating labels, Friedman defined a far faster-growing function.[9] For a positive integer n, take [a] to be the largest m so that we have the following:

There is a sequence T1, ..., Tm of rooted trees labelled from a set of n labels, where each Ti has at most i vertices, such that does not hold for any .

The TREE sequence begins , , before suddenly explodes to a value so large that many other "large" combinatorial constants, such as Friedman's , , and Graham's number,[b] are extremely small by comparison. A lower bound for , and, hence, an extremely weak lower bound for , is .[c][10] Graham's number, for example, is much smaller than the lower bound , which is approximately , where is Graham's function.

See also

[edit]

Notes

[edit]
^ a Friedman originally denoted this function by TR[n].
^ b n(k) is defined as the length of the longest possible sequence that can be constructed with a k-letter alphabet such that no block of letters xi,...,x2i is a subsequence of any later block xj,...,x2j.[11] .
^ c A(x) taking one argument, is defined as A(x, x), where A(k, n), taking two arguments, is a particular version of Ackermann's function defined as: A(1, n) = 2n, A(k+1, 1) = A(k, 1), A(k+1, n+1) = A(k, A(k+1, n)).

References

[edit]

Citations

  1. ^ "The Enormity of the Number TREE(3) Is Beyond Comprehension". Popular Mechanics. 20 October 2017. Retrieved 4 February 2025.
  2. ^ Simpson 1985, Theorem 1.8
  3. ^ Friedman 2002, p. 60
  4. ^ Simpson 1985, Definition 4.1
  5. ^ Simpson 1985, Theorem 5.14
  6. ^ Marcone 2005, pp. 8–9
  7. ^ Rathjen & Weiermann 1993.
  8. ^ Smith 1985, p. 120
  9. ^ Friedman, Harvey (28 March 2006). "273:Sigma01/optimal/size". Ohio State University Department of Maths. Retrieved 8 August 2017.
  10. ^ Friedman, Harvey M. (1 June 2000). "Enormous Integers In Real Life" (PDF). Ohio State University. Retrieved 8 August 2017.
  11. ^ Friedman, Harvey M. (8 October 1998). "Long Finite Sequences" (PDF). Ohio State University Department of Mathematics. pp. 5, 48 (Thm.6.8). Retrieved 8 August 2017.

Bibliography