Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Does $\mathsf{DC}$ imply $\mathsf{AC}_\omega$, uniformly?

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2305.06676 v2 pith:QSXEF2LB submitted 2023-05-11 math.LO

classification math.LO
keywords mathsfomegachoiceaxiomassertscountablerightarrowbinary
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
abstract

The Axiom of Dependent Choice $\mathsf{DC}$ and the Axiom of Countable Choice $\mathsf{AC}_\omega$ are two weak forms of the Axiom of Choice that can be stated for a specific set: $\mathsf{DC}(X)$ asserts that any total binary relation on $X$ has an infinite chain, while $\mathsf{AC}_\omega (X)$ asserts that any countable collection of nonempty subsets of $X$ has a choice function. It is well-known that $\mathsf{DC} \Rightarrow \mathsf{AC}_\omega$. We study for which sets and under which hypotheses $\mathsf{DC}(X) \Rightarrow \mathsf{AC}_\omega (X)$, and then we show it is consistent with $\mathsf{ZF}$ that there is a set $A \subseteq \mathbb{R}$ for which $\mathsf{DC} (A)$ holds, but $\mathsf{AC}_\omega (A)$ fails.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Pith tools