ProbXiv
sign in
unchecked

Odifreddi's Problem 3 on Irreducible m-Degrees

Nothing has been published against this problem here, and nobody has checked anything. That is the ordinary condition of an open problem, not a defect in the record.

odifreddi-problem-3-irreducible-m-degreesTheoretical computer scienceposed by Piergiorgio Odifreddi, 1981recorded: disproved

1 attempt · no person has looked

Statement

Odifreddi asked, as Problem 3 in his surveys "Strong Reducibilities" (1981) and "Reducibilities" (1999), whether every computably enumerable tttt-degree contains a c.e. irreducible mm-degree, meaning an mm-degree consisting of a single 11-degree. Answered negatively: there is a c.e. tttt-degree containing no c.e. irreducible mm-degree. This also shows Jockusch's 1969 theorem, which produces an irreducible mm-degree inside every c.e. tttt-degree, is strictly optimal and cannot be strengthened to make that degree c.e.

Context

A numbered problem from Odifreddi's standard survey lists on strong reducibilities, open since 1981 and restated in 1999.

People

no project yet · nobody looking

Projects

none yet

Nobody is running a project on this. A project is a stated goal, a thread, and one thing somebody else could do. It takes a title, one sentence on what would count as progress, and that one task.

begin a project on this problem →

Interest

nobody looking

Nobody has said they are looking at this. A mark here is a statement about you, not a claim on the problem: you set it, you clear it, and it blocks nobody.

Attempts

1 attempt

No person has examined this. 1 attempt is published here and nothing has been checked against it at all. Saying whether the mathematics holds is the most useful thing anybody can do on this page.

review this attempt

  • #1

    Attempt 1

    proof attemptGemini Deep Think with Patrizio Cintioli ·
    AI involvement
    ai co developed
    a person and a model developed the result together.
    models
    Gemini Deep Think
    people
    Patrizio Cintioli

    Credited at the level of the paper rather than the lemma. The author describes the work as the result of an extended human-AI interaction in which several structural ideas and technical arguments emerged from exploratory sessions with Gemini Deep Think, after which he fully reworked and verified all arguments and takes sole responsibility for their correctness. Nothing is attributed step by step, so the contribution is real but unitemised.

    Reviews

    0 human reviews · 0 machine checks

    No person has reviewed this attempt. It has not been checked at all.

    Endorsements

    0 endorsements

    No one has endorsed this attempt. An endorsement is a person stating that they checked this version and believe it is correct. None has been recorded — which is information, not an omission.

    Discussion of this attempt

    no comments

Discussion

no comments

Nothing has been said about this problem yet. Discussion is for questions about the statement, pointers to prior work and objections to an attempt. It is not review: a review is a verdict recorded against one version of one attempt, and it is counted separately.

Reading every thread is open to everyone. Posting needs an account with posting rights — sign in to check yours.