The 42 reducts of the random ordered graph Michael Pinsker - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
the 42 reducts of the random ordered graph
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

The 42 reducts of the random ordered graph Michael Pinsker - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Feb 27, 2024 190 likes •1.94k views

The 42 reducts of the random ordered graph Michael Pinsker Technische Universitt Wien / Universit Diderot - Paris 7 BLAST 2013 42 Michael Pinsker Outline Part I: The setting of The Answer Part II: The 42 reducts of the random ordered

slide-1
SLIDE 1

The 42 reducts of the random ordered graph

Michael Pinsker

Technische Universität Wien / Université Diderot - Paris 7

BLAST 2013

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Outline

Part I: The setting of The Answer Part II: The 42 reducts of the random ordered graph Part III: Discussion of The Answer Part IV: The question to The Answer

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Part I: The setting of The Answer

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Homogeneous structures

Let ∆ be a structure.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Homogeneous structures

Let ∆ be a structure. Definition ∆ is homogeneous :↔ every isomorphism between finitely generated substructures of ∆ extends to an automorphism of ∆.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Homogeneous structures

Let ∆ be a structure. Definition ∆ is homogeneous :↔ every isomorphism between finitely generated substructures of ∆ extends to an automorphism of ∆. Examples

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Homogeneous structures

Let ∆ be a structure. Definition ∆ is homogeneous :↔ every isomorphism between finitely generated substructures of ∆ extends to an automorphism of ∆. Examples Order of the rationals (Q; <)

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Homogeneous structures

Let ∆ be a structure. Definition ∆ is homogeneous :↔ every isomorphism between finitely generated substructures of ∆ extends to an automorphism of ∆. Examples Order of the rationals (Q; <) Random graph (V; E)

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Homogeneous structures

Let ∆ be a structure. Definition ∆ is homogeneous :↔ every isomorphism between finitely generated substructures of ∆ extends to an automorphism of ∆. Examples Order of the rationals (Q; <) Random graph (V; E) Free Boolean algebra with ℵ0 generators

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-10
SLIDE 10

BLAST

Boolean algebras Lattices Universal Algebra Set theory Topology

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-11
SLIDE 11

BLAST

Boolean algebras Lattices Universal Algebra Set theory Topology

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-12
SLIDE 12

BLAST

Boolean algebras Lattices Universal Algebra Set theory Topology

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Fraïssé limits

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Fraïssé limits

Let C be a class of finitely generated structures in a countable language, closed under isomorphism.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Fraïssé limits

Let C be a class of finitely generated structures in a countable language, closed under isomorphism. Theorem (Fraïssé) Assume C

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Fraïssé limits

Let C be a class of finitely generated structures in a countable language, closed under isomorphism. Theorem (Fraïssé) Assume C is closed under substructures

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Fraïssé limits

Let C be a class of finitely generated structures in a countable language, closed under isomorphism. Theorem (Fraïssé) Assume C is closed under substructures has joint embeddings: for all B, C ∈ C there is D ∈ C containing isomorphic copies of B, C

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Fraïssé limits

Let C be a class of finitely generated structures in a countable language, closed under isomorphism. Theorem (Fraïssé) Assume C is closed under substructures has joint embeddings: for all B, C ∈ C there is D ∈ C containing isomorphic copies of B, C has amalgamation: for all A, B, C ∈ C and embeddings e : A → B and e′ : A → C there is D ∈ C and embeddings f : B → D and f ′ : C → D such that f ◦ e = f ′ ◦ e′.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-19
SLIDE 19

Fraïssé limits

Let C be a class of finitely generated structures in a countable language, closed under isomorphism. Theorem (Fraïssé) Assume C is closed under substructures has joint embeddings: for all B, C ∈ C there is D ∈ C containing isomorphic copies of B, C has amalgamation: for all A, B, C ∈ C and embeddings e : A → B and e′ : A → C there is D ∈ C and embeddings f : B → D and f ′ : C → D such that f ◦ e = f ′ ◦ e′. Then there exists a unique countable homogeneous structure ∆ whose age (=substructures up to iso) equals C.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Amalgamation

A

D C B

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-21
SLIDE 21

Examples

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-22
SLIDE 22

Examples

(Finite) linear orders ↔ (Q; <)

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-23
SLIDE 23

Examples

(Finite) linear orders ↔ (Q; <) Undirected graphs ↔ random graph (V; E)

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-24
SLIDE 24

Examples

(Finite) linear orders ↔ (Q; <) Undirected graphs ↔ random graph (V; E) Boolean algebras ↔ random (= free) Boolean algebra

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-25
SLIDE 25

Examples

(Finite) linear orders ↔ (Q; <) Undirected graphs ↔ random graph (V; E) Boolean algebras ↔ random (= free) Boolean algebra Lattices ↔ random lattice

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-26
SLIDE 26

Examples

(Finite) linear orders ↔ (Q; <) Undirected graphs ↔ random graph (V; E) Boolean algebras ↔ random (= free) Boolean algebra Lattices ↔ random lattice Distributive lattices ↔ random distributive lattice

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-27
SLIDE 27

Examples

(Finite) linear orders ↔ (Q; <) Undirected graphs ↔ random graph (V; E) Boolean algebras ↔ random (= free) Boolean algebra Lattices ↔ random lattice Distributive lattices ↔ random distributive lattice Partial orders ↔ random partial order

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-28
SLIDE 28

Examples

(Finite) linear orders ↔ (Q; <) Undirected graphs ↔ random graph (V; E) Boolean algebras ↔ random (= free) Boolean algebra Lattices ↔ random lattice Distributive lattices ↔ random distributive lattice Partial orders ↔ random partial order Tournaments ↔ random tournament

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-29
SLIDE 29

Examples

(Finite) linear orders ↔ (Q; <) Undirected graphs ↔ random graph (V; E) Boolean algebras ↔ random (= free) Boolean algebra Lattices ↔ random lattice Distributive lattices ↔ random distributive lattice Partial orders ↔ random partial order Tournaments ↔ random tournament Linearly ordered graphs ↔ random ordered graph (D; <, E)

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-30
SLIDE 30

Reducts

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-31
SLIDE 31

Reducts

Let ∆ be a structure.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-32
SLIDE 32

Reducts

Let ∆ be a structure. Definition A reduct of ∆ is a structure on the same domain whose relations and functions are first-order definable in ∆ (without parameters).

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-33
SLIDE 33

Reducts

Let ∆ be a structure. Definition A reduct of ∆ is a structure on the same domain whose relations and functions are first-order definable in ∆ (without parameters). Examples

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-34
SLIDE 34

Reducts

Let ∆ be a structure. Definition A reduct of ∆ is a structure on the same domain whose relations and functions are first-order definable in ∆ (without parameters). Examples (Q; <): reduct (Q; Between(x, y, z))

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-35
SLIDE 35

Reducts

Let ∆ be a structure. Definition A reduct of ∆ is a structure on the same domain whose relations and functions are first-order definable in ∆ (without parameters). Examples (Q; <): reduct (Q; Between(x, y, z)) (Q; <): reduct (Q; >)

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-36
SLIDE 36

Reducts

Let ∆ be a structure. Definition A reduct of ∆ is a structure on the same domain whose relations and functions are first-order definable in ∆ (without parameters). Examples (Q; <): reduct (Q; Between(x, y, z)) (Q; <): reduct (Q; >) random graph (V; E): reduct (V; K3(x, y, z))

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-37
SLIDE 37

Reducts

Let ∆ be a structure. Definition A reduct of ∆ is a structure on the same domain whose relations and functions are first-order definable in ∆ (without parameters). Examples (Q; <): reduct (Q; Between(x, y, z)) (Q; <): reduct (Q; >) random graph (V; E): reduct (V; K3(x, y, z)) random poset (P; ≤): reduct (P; ⊥(x, y))

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-38
SLIDE 38

Reducts

Let ∆ be a structure. Definition A reduct of ∆ is a structure on the same domain whose relations and functions are first-order definable in ∆ (without parameters). Examples (Q; <): reduct (Q; Between(x, y, z)) (Q; <): reduct (Q; >) random graph (V; E): reduct (V; K3(x, y, z)) random poset (P; ≤): reduct (P; ⊥(x, y)) Problem Understand the reducts of homogeneous structures.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-39
SLIDE 39

Motivation

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-40
SLIDE 40

Motivation

Why reducts?

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-41
SLIDE 41

Motivation

Why reducts? Understand ∆ itself:

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-42
SLIDE 42

Motivation

Why reducts? Understand ∆ itself: – its first-order theory

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-43
SLIDE 43

Motivation

Why reducts? Understand ∆ itself: – its first-order theory – its symmetries (via connection with permutation groups)

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-44
SLIDE 44

Motivation

Why reducts? Understand ∆ itself: – its first-order theory – its symmetries (via connection with permutation groups) Understand the age C of ∆:

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-45
SLIDE 45

Motivation

Why reducts? Understand ∆ itself: – its first-order theory – its symmetries (via connection with permutation groups) Understand the age C of ∆: – uniform group actions on C (via permutation groups - combinatorics of C)

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-46
SLIDE 46

Motivation

Why reducts? Understand ∆ itself: – its first-order theory – its symmetries (via connection with permutation groups) Understand the age C of ∆: – uniform group actions on C (via permutation groups - combinatorics of C) – Constraint Satisfaction Problems related to C: Graph-SAT, Poset-SAT,. . .

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-47
SLIDE 47

Reducts up to first-order equivalence

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-48
SLIDE 48

Reducts up to first-order equivalence

For reducts Γ, Γ′ of ∆ set Γ ≤ Γ′ iff Γ is a reduct of Γ′.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-49
SLIDE 49

Reducts up to first-order equivalence

For reducts Γ, Γ′ of ∆ set Γ ≤ Γ′ iff Γ is a reduct of Γ′. Quasiorder.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-50
SLIDE 50

Reducts up to first-order equivalence

For reducts Γ, Γ′ of ∆ set Γ ≤ Γ′ iff Γ is a reduct of Γ′. Quasiorder. Consider reducts Γ, Γ′ equivalent iff Γ ≤ Γ′ and Γ′ ≤ Γ.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-51
SLIDE 51

Reducts up to first-order equivalence

For reducts Γ, Γ′ of ∆ set Γ ≤ Γ′ iff Γ is a reduct of Γ′. Quasiorder. Consider reducts Γ, Γ′ equivalent iff Γ ≤ Γ′ and Γ′ ≤ Γ. Factoring out yields a complete lattice.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-52
SLIDE 52

Reducts up to first-order equivalence

For reducts Γ, Γ′ of ∆ set Γ ≤ Γ′ iff Γ is a reduct of Γ′. Quasiorder. Consider reducts Γ, Γ′ equivalent iff Γ ≤ Γ′ and Γ′ ≤ Γ. Factoring out yields a complete lattice. Multiple choice: Equivalent or not?

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-53
SLIDE 53

Reducts up to first-order equivalence

For reducts Γ, Γ′ of ∆ set Γ ≤ Γ′ iff Γ is a reduct of Γ′. Quasiorder. Consider reducts Γ, Γ′ equivalent iff Γ ≤ Γ′ and Γ′ ≤ Γ. Factoring out yields a complete lattice. Multiple choice: Equivalent or not? (Q; <) and (Q; >)

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-54
SLIDE 54

Reducts up to first-order equivalence

For reducts Γ, Γ′ of ∆ set Γ ≤ Γ′ iff Γ is a reduct of Γ′. Quasiorder. Consider reducts Γ, Γ′ equivalent iff Γ ≤ Γ′ and Γ′ ≤ Γ. Factoring out yields a complete lattice. Multiple choice: Equivalent or not? (Q; <) and (Q; >) (Q; <) and (Q; Between(x, y, z))

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-55
SLIDE 55

Reducts up to first-order equivalence

For reducts Γ, Γ′ of ∆ set Γ ≤ Γ′ iff Γ is a reduct of Γ′. Quasiorder. Consider reducts Γ, Γ′ equivalent iff Γ ≤ Γ′ and Γ′ ≤ Γ. Factoring out yields a complete lattice. Multiple choice: Equivalent or not? (Q; <) and (Q; >) (Q; <) and (Q; Between(x, y, z)) random poset (P; ≤) and (P; ⊥(x, y))

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-56
SLIDE 56

Reducts up to first-order equivalence

For reducts Γ, Γ′ of ∆ set Γ ≤ Γ′ iff Γ is a reduct of Γ′. Quasiorder. Consider reducts Γ, Γ′ equivalent iff Γ ≤ Γ′ and Γ′ ≤ Γ. Factoring out yields a complete lattice. Multiple choice: Equivalent or not? (Q; <) and (Q; >) (Q; <) and (Q; Between(x, y, z)) random poset (P; ≤) and (P; ⊥(x, y)) random graph (V; E) and (V; K3(x, y, z))

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-57
SLIDE 57

Reducts up to first-order equivalence

For reducts Γ, Γ′ of ∆ set Γ ≤ Γ′ iff Γ is a reduct of Γ′. Quasiorder. Consider reducts Γ, Γ′ equivalent iff Γ ≤ Γ′ and Γ′ ≤ Γ. Factoring out yields a complete lattice. Multiple choice: Equivalent or not? (Q; <) and (Q; >) (Q; <) and (Q; Between(x, y, z)) random poset (P; ≤) and (P; ⊥(x, y)) random graph (V; E) and (V; K3(x, y, z)) Question How many inequivalent reducts?

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-58
SLIDE 58

Examples

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-59
SLIDE 59

Examples

(Q; <): 5 (Cameron ’76)

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-60
SLIDE 60

Examples

(Q; <): 5 (Cameron ’76) random graph (V; E): 5 (Thomas ’91)

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-61
SLIDE 61

Examples

(Q; <): 5 (Cameron ’76) random graph (V; E): 5 (Thomas ’91) random k-hypergraph: 2k + 1 (Thomas ’96)

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-62
SLIDE 62

Examples

(Q; <): 5 (Cameron ’76) random graph (V; E): 5 (Thomas ’91) random k-hypergraph: 2k + 1 (Thomas ’96) random tournament: 5 (Bennett ’97)

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-63
SLIDE 63

Examples

(Q; <): 5 (Cameron ’76) random graph (V; E): 5 (Thomas ’91) random k-hypergraph: 2k + 1 (Thomas ’96) random tournament: 5 (Bennett ’97) (Q; <, 0): 116 (Junker+Ziegler ’08)

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-64
SLIDE 64

Examples

(Q; <): 5 (Cameron ’76) random graph (V; E): 5 (Thomas ’91) random k-hypergraph: 2k + 1 (Thomas ’96) random tournament: 5 (Bennett ’97) (Q; <, 0): 116 (Junker+Ziegler ’08) random partial order: 5 (Pach+MP+Pongrácz+Szabó ’11)

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-65
SLIDE 65

Examples

(Q; <): 5 (Cameron ’76) random graph (V; E): 5 (Thomas ’91) random k-hypergraph: 2k + 1 (Thomas ’96) random tournament: 5 (Bennett ’97) (Q; <, 0): 116 (Junker+Ziegler ’08) random partial order: 5 (Pach+MP+Pongrácz+Szabó ’11) Conjecture (Thomas ’91) Homogeneous structures in finite relational language have finitely many reducts.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-66
SLIDE 66

Permutation groups

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-67
SLIDE 67

Permutation groups

A permutation group is closed :↔ it contains all permutations which it can interpolate on finite subsets.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-68
SLIDE 68

Permutation groups

A permutation group is closed :↔ it contains all permutations which it can interpolate on finite subsets. Theorem (Corollary of Ryll-Nardzewski, Engeler, Svenonius) Let ∆ be homogeneous in a finite relational language. Then the mapping Γ → Aut(Γ)

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-69
SLIDE 69

Permutation groups

A permutation group is closed :↔ it contains all permutations which it can interpolate on finite subsets. Theorem (Corollary of Ryll-Nardzewski, Engeler, Svenonius) Let ∆ be homogeneous in a finite relational language. Then the mapping Γ → Aut(Γ) is an anti-isomorphism from the lattice of reducts to the lattice of closed supergroups of Aut(∆).

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-70
SLIDE 70

BLAST

Boolean algebras Lattices Universal Algebra Set theory Topology

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-71
SLIDE 71

BLAST

Boolean algebras Lattices Universal Algebra Set theory Topology

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-72
SLIDE 72

The rationals (Q; <)

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-73
SLIDE 73

The rationals (Q; <)

Let ↔ be any permutation of Q which reverses the order.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-74
SLIDE 74

The rationals (Q; <)

Let ↔ be any permutation of Q which reverses the order. Let be any permutation of Q which for some irrational π puts (−∞; π) behind (π; ∞) and preserves the order otherwise.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-75
SLIDE 75

The rationals (Q; <)

Let ↔ be any permutation of Q which reverses the order. Let be any permutation of Q which for some irrational π puts (−∞; π) behind (π; ∞) and preserves the order otherwise. Theorem (Cameron ’76) The closed supergroups of Aut(Q; <) are precisely:

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-76
SLIDE 76

The rationals (Q; <)

Let ↔ be any permutation of Q which reverses the order. Let be any permutation of Q which for some irrational π puts (−∞; π) behind (π; ∞) and preserves the order otherwise. Theorem (Cameron ’76) The closed supergroups of Aut(Q; <) are precisely: Aut(Q; <)

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-77
SLIDE 77

The rationals (Q; <)

Let ↔ be any permutation of Q which reverses the order. Let be any permutation of Q which for some irrational π puts (−∞; π) behind (π; ∞) and preserves the order otherwise. Theorem (Cameron ’76) The closed supergroups of Aut(Q; <) are precisely: Aut(Q; <) {↔} ∪ Aut(Q; <)

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-78
SLIDE 78

The rationals (Q; <)

Let ↔ be any permutation of Q which reverses the order. Let be any permutation of Q which for some irrational π puts (−∞; π) behind (π; ∞) and preserves the order otherwise. Theorem (Cameron ’76) The closed supergroups of Aut(Q; <) are precisely: Aut(Q; <) {↔} ∪ Aut(Q; <) {} ∪ Aut(Q; <)

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-79
SLIDE 79

The rationals (Q; <)

Let ↔ be any permutation of Q which reverses the order. Let be any permutation of Q which for some irrational π puts (−∞; π) behind (π; ∞) and preserves the order otherwise. Theorem (Cameron ’76) The closed supergroups of Aut(Q; <) are precisely: Aut(Q; <) {↔} ∪ Aut(Q; <) {} ∪ Aut(Q; <) {↔, } ∪ Aut(Q; <)

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-80
SLIDE 80

The rationals (Q; <)

Let ↔ be any permutation of Q which reverses the order. Let be any permutation of Q which for some irrational π puts (−∞; π) behind (π; ∞) and preserves the order otherwise. Theorem (Cameron ’76) The closed supergroups of Aut(Q; <) are precisely: Aut(Q; <) {↔} ∪ Aut(Q; <) {} ∪ Aut(Q; <) {↔, } ∪ Aut(Q; <) Sym(Q)

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-81
SLIDE 81

The rationals (Q; <)

Let ↔ be any permutation of Q which reverses the order. Let be any permutation of Q which for some irrational π puts (−∞; π) behind (π; ∞) and preserves the order otherwise. Theorem (Cameron ’76) The closed supergroups of Aut(Q; <) are precisely: Aut(Q; <) {↔} ∪ Aut(Q; <) = Aut(Q; Between(x, y, z)) {} ∪ Aut(Q; <) {↔, } ∪ Aut(Q; <) Sym(Q)

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-82
SLIDE 82

The rationals (Q; <)

Let ↔ be any permutation of Q which reverses the order. Let be any permutation of Q which for some irrational π puts (−∞; π) behind (π; ∞) and preserves the order otherwise. Theorem (Cameron ’76) The closed supergroups of Aut(Q; <) are precisely: Aut(Q; <) {↔} ∪ Aut(Q; <) = Aut(Q; Between(x, y, z)) {} ∪ Aut(Q; <) = Aut(Q; Cyclic(x, y, z)) {↔, } ∪ Aut(Q; <) Sym(Q)

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-83
SLIDE 83

The rationals (Q; <)

Let ↔ be any permutation of Q which reverses the order. Let be any permutation of Q which for some irrational π puts (−∞; π) behind (π; ∞) and preserves the order otherwise. Theorem (Cameron ’76) The closed supergroups of Aut(Q; <) are precisely: Aut(Q; <) {↔} ∪ Aut(Q; <) = Aut(Q; Between(x, y, z)) {} ∪ Aut(Q; <) = Aut(Q; Cyclic(x, y, z)) {↔, } ∪ Aut(Q; <) = Aut(Q; Separate(x, y, u, v)) Sym(Q)

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-84
SLIDE 84

The random graph (V; E)

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-85
SLIDE 85

The random graph (V; E)

Let − be any permutation of V which switches edges and non-edges.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-86
SLIDE 86

The random graph (V; E)

Let − be any permutation of V which switches edges and non-edges. Let sw be any permutation which for some finite A ⊆ V switches edges and non-edges between A and V \ A and preserves the graph relation on A and V \ A.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-87
SLIDE 87

The random graph (V; E)

Let − be any permutation of V which switches edges and non-edges. Let sw be any permutation which for some finite A ⊆ V switches edges and non-edges between A and V \ A and preserves the graph relation on A and V \ A. Theorem (Thomas ’91) The closed supergroups of Aut(V; E) are precisely:

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-88
SLIDE 88

The random graph (V; E)

Let − be any permutation of V which switches edges and non-edges. Let sw be any permutation which for some finite A ⊆ V switches edges and non-edges between A and V \ A and preserves the graph relation on A and V \ A. Theorem (Thomas ’91) The closed supergroups of Aut(V; E) are precisely: Aut(V; E)

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-89
SLIDE 89

The random graph (V; E)

Let − be any permutation of V which switches edges and non-edges. Let sw be any permutation which for some finite A ⊆ V switches edges and non-edges between A and V \ A and preserves the graph relation on A and V \ A. Theorem (Thomas ’91) The closed supergroups of Aut(V; E) are precisely: Aut(V; E) {sw} ∪ Aut(V; E)

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-90
SLIDE 90

The random graph (V; E)

Let − be any permutation of V which switches edges and non-edges. Let sw be any permutation which for some finite A ⊆ V switches edges and non-edges between A and V \ A and preserves the graph relation on A and V \ A. Theorem (Thomas ’91) The closed supergroups of Aut(V; E) are precisely: Aut(V; E) {sw} ∪ Aut(V; E) {−} ∪ Aut(V; E)

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-91
SLIDE 91

The random graph (V; E)

Let − be any permutation of V which switches edges and non-edges. Let sw be any permutation which for some finite A ⊆ V switches edges and non-edges between A and V \ A and preserves the graph relation on A and V \ A. Theorem (Thomas ’91) The closed supergroups of Aut(V; E) are precisely: Aut(V; E) {sw} ∪ Aut(V; E) {−} ∪ Aut(V; E) {−, sw} ∪ Aut(V; E)

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-92
SLIDE 92

The random graph (V; E)

Let − be any permutation of V which switches edges and non-edges. Let sw be any permutation which for some finite A ⊆ V switches edges and non-edges between A and V \ A and preserves the graph relation on A and V \ A. Theorem (Thomas ’91) The closed supergroups of Aut(V; E) are precisely: Aut(V; E) {sw} ∪ Aut(V; E) {−} ∪ Aut(V; E) {−, sw} ∪ Aut(V; E) Sym(V)

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-93
SLIDE 93

The random graph (V; E)

Let − be any permutation of V which switches edges and non-edges. Let sw be any permutation which for some finite A ⊆ V switches edges and non-edges between A and V \ A and preserves the graph relation on A and V \ A. Theorem (Thomas ’91) The closed supergroups of Aut(V; E) are precisely: Aut(V; E) {sw} ∪ Aut(V; E) {−} ∪ Aut(V; E) {−, sw} ∪ Aut(V; E) Sym(V) For k ≥ 1, let R(k) consist of the k-tuples of distinct elements of V which induce an odd number of edges.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-94
SLIDE 94

The random graph (V; E)

Let − be any permutation of V which switches edges and non-edges. Let sw be any permutation which for some finite A ⊆ V switches edges and non-edges between A and V \ A and preserves the graph relation on A and V \ A. Theorem (Thomas ’91) The closed supergroups of Aut(V; E) are precisely: Aut(V; E) {sw} ∪ Aut(V; E) = Aut(V; R(3)) {−} ∪ Aut(V; E) {−, sw} ∪ Aut(V; E) Sym(V) For k ≥ 1, let R(k) consist of the k-tuples of distinct elements of V which induce an odd number of edges.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-95
SLIDE 95

The random graph (V; E)

Let − be any permutation of V which switches edges and non-edges. Let sw be any permutation which for some finite A ⊆ V switches edges and non-edges between A and V \ A and preserves the graph relation on A and V \ A. Theorem (Thomas ’91) The closed supergroups of Aut(V; E) are precisely: Aut(V; E) {sw} ∪ Aut(V; E) = Aut(V; R(3)) {−} ∪ Aut(V; E) = Aut(V; R(4)) {−, sw} ∪ Aut(V; E) Sym(V) For k ≥ 1, let R(k) consist of the k-tuples of distinct elements of V which induce an odd number of edges.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-96
SLIDE 96

The random graph (V; E)

Let − be any permutation of V which switches edges and non-edges. Let sw be any permutation which for some finite A ⊆ V switches edges and non-edges between A and V \ A and preserves the graph relation on A and V \ A. Theorem (Thomas ’91) The closed supergroups of Aut(V; E) are precisely: Aut(V; E) {sw} ∪ Aut(V; E) = Aut(V; R(3)) {−} ∪ Aut(V; E) = Aut(V; R(4)) {−, sw} ∪ Aut(V; E) = Aut(V; R(5)) Sym(V) For k ≥ 1, let R(k) consist of the k-tuples of distinct elements of V which induce an odd number of edges.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-97
SLIDE 97

Part II: The 42 reducts of the random ordered graph

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-98
SLIDE 98

The random ordered graph

Definition The random ordered graph (D; <, E) is the unique countable linearly ordered graph which contains all finite linearly ordered graphs is homogeneous.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-99
SLIDE 99

The random ordered graph

Definition The random ordered graph (D; <, E) is the unique countable linearly ordered graph which contains all finite linearly ordered graphs is homogeneous. Observation (D; <) is the order of the rationals (D; E) is the random graph

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-100
SLIDE 100

The random ordered graph

Definition The random ordered graph (D; <, E) is the unique countable linearly ordered graph which contains all finite linearly ordered graphs is homogeneous. Observation (D; <) is the order of the rationals (D; E) is the random graph This is because the two structures are superposed freely, i.e., in all possible ways.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-101
SLIDE 101

Strong amalgamation

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-102
SLIDE 102

Strong amalgamation

Definition A class C has strong amalgamation :↔ it has amalgamation and the amalgamation can be done without identifying elements outside A.

A D C B

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-103
SLIDE 103

Mixing

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-104
SLIDE 104

Mixing

Let τ1, τ2 be disjoint languages. Let C1, C2 Fraïssé classes in those languages, ∆1, ∆2 be their limits.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-105
SLIDE 105

Mixing

Let τ1, τ2 be disjoint languages. Let C1, C2 Fraïssé classes in those languages, ∆1, ∆2 be their limits. Free superposition Assume that C1, C2 have strong amalgamation.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-106
SLIDE 106

Mixing

Let τ1, τ2 be disjoint languages. Let C1, C2 Fraïssé classes in those languages, ∆1, ∆2 be their limits. Free superposition Assume that C1, C2 have strong amalgamation. Then the class C of τ1 ∪ τ2-structures whose τi-reduct is in Ci

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-107
SLIDE 107

Mixing

Let τ1, τ2 be disjoint languages. Let C1, C2 Fraïssé classes in those languages, ∆1, ∆2 be their limits. Free superposition Assume that C1, C2 have strong amalgamation. Then the class C of τ1 ∪ τ2-structures whose τi-reduct is in Ci is a Fraïssé class and the τi-reduct of its limit is isomorphic to ∆i.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-108
SLIDE 108

Trivial reducts of the random ordered graph

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-109
SLIDE 109

Trivial reducts of the random ordered graph

Every reduct of (D; <) is a reduct of the random ordered graph.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-110
SLIDE 110

Trivial reducts of the random ordered graph

Every reduct of (D; <) is a reduct of the random ordered graph. Every reduct of (D; E) is a reduct of the random ordered graph.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-111
SLIDE 111

Trivial reducts of the random ordered graph

Every reduct of (D; <) is a reduct of the random ordered graph. Every reduct of (D; E) is a reduct of the random ordered graph. If (D; R) is a reduct of (D; <) and (D; S) is a reduct of (D; E) then (D; R, S) is a reduct of the random ordered graph.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-112
SLIDE 112

Trivial reducts of the random ordered graph

Every reduct of (D; <) is a reduct of the random ordered graph. Every reduct of (D; E) is a reduct of the random ordered graph. If (D; R) is a reduct of (D; <) and (D; S) is a reduct of (D; E) then (D; R, S) is a reduct of the random ordered graph. Corresponds to Aut(D; R) ∩ Aut(D; S).

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-113
SLIDE 113

Trivial reducts of the random ordered graph

Every reduct of (D; <) is a reduct of the random ordered graph. Every reduct of (D; E) is a reduct of the random ordered graph. If (D; R) is a reduct of (D; <) and (D; S) is a reduct of (D; E) then (D; R, S) is a reduct of the random ordered graph. Corresponds to Aut(D; R) ∩ Aut(D; S). Yields distinct reducts because of free superposition.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-114
SLIDE 114

Trivial reducts of the random ordered graph

Every reduct of (D; <) is a reduct of the random ordered graph. Every reduct of (D; E) is a reduct of the random ordered graph. If (D; R) is a reduct of (D; <) and (D; S) is a reduct of (D; E) then (D; R, S) is a reduct of the random ordered graph. Corresponds to Aut(D; R) ∩ Aut(D; S). Yields distinct reducts because of free superposition. Examples

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-115
SLIDE 115

Trivial reducts of the random ordered graph

Every reduct of (D; <) is a reduct of the random ordered graph. Every reduct of (D; E) is a reduct of the random ordered graph. If (D; R) is a reduct of (D; <) and (D; S) is a reduct of (D; E) then (D; R, S) is a reduct of the random ordered graph. Corresponds to Aut(D; R) ∩ Aut(D; S). Yields distinct reducts because of free superposition. Examples Keeping the order while flipping the graph relation.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-116
SLIDE 116

Trivial reducts of the random ordered graph

Every reduct of (D; <) is a reduct of the random ordered graph. Every reduct of (D; E) is a reduct of the random ordered graph. If (D; R) is a reduct of (D; <) and (D; S) is a reduct of (D; E) then (D; R, S) is a reduct of the random ordered graph. Corresponds to Aut(D; R) ∩ Aut(D; S). Yields distinct reducts because of free superposition. Examples Keeping the order while flipping the graph relation. Reversing the order while keeping the graph relation.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-117
SLIDE 117

Trivial reducts of the random ordered graph

Every reduct of (D; <) is a reduct of the random ordered graph. Every reduct of (D; E) is a reduct of the random ordered graph. If (D; R) is a reduct of (D; <) and (D; S) is a reduct of (D; E) then (D; R, S) is a reduct of the random ordered graph. Corresponds to Aut(D; R) ∩ Aut(D; S). Yields distinct reducts because of free superposition. Examples Keeping the order while flipping the graph relation. Reversing the order while keeping the graph relation. Lemma The random ordered graph has at least 25 reducts.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-118
SLIDE 118

Similarities between the order and the graph reducts

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-119
SLIDE 119

Similarities between the order and the graph reducts

The following permutations yield new non-trivial reducts.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-120
SLIDE 120

Similarities between the order and the graph reducts

The following permutations yield new non-trivial reducts. reversing the order and simultaneously flipping the graph relation

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-121
SLIDE 121

Similarities between the order and the graph reducts

The following permutations yield new non-trivial reducts. reversing the order and simultaneously flipping the graph relation for an irrational π, put (−∞, π) behind (π, ∞) whilst flipping the graph relation between these parts.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-122
SLIDE 122

Similarities between the order and the graph reducts

The following permutations yield new non-trivial reducts. reversing the order and simultaneously flipping the graph relation for an irrational π, put (−∞, π) behind (π, ∞) whilst flipping the graph relation between these parts. No other combination of this kind!

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-123
SLIDE 123

Similarities between the order and the graph reducts

The following permutations yield new non-trivial reducts. reversing the order and simultaneously flipping the graph relation for an irrational π, put (−∞, π) behind (π, ∞) whilst flipping the graph relation between these parts. No other combination of this kind! Lemma The random ordered graph has at least 27 reducts.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-124
SLIDE 124

Hello random tournament!

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-125
SLIDE 125

Hello random tournament!

Definition A tournament is a digraph with precisely one edge between any two vertices.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-126
SLIDE 126

Hello random tournament!

Definition A tournament is a digraph with precisely one edge between any two vertices. Theorem (Bennett ’97) The random tournament has 5 reducts.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-127
SLIDE 127

Hello random tournament!

Definition A tournament is a digraph with precisely one edge between any two vertices. Theorem (Bennett ’97) The random tournament has 5 reducts. Observation Set T(x, y) iff x < y ∧ E(x, y) or x > y ∧ N(x, y). Then (D; T) is the random tournament.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-128
SLIDE 128

Hello random tournament!

Definition A tournament is a digraph with precisely one edge between any two vertices. Theorem (Bennett ’97) The random tournament has 5 reducts. Observation Set T(x, y) iff x < y ∧ E(x, y) or x > y ∧ N(x, y). Then (D; T) is the random tournament. Lemma The random ordered graph has at least 27+5-1=31 reducts.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-129
SLIDE 129

Finally, some asymmetry

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-130
SLIDE 130

Finally, some asymmetry

The following permutations yield new non-trivial reducts.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-131
SLIDE 131

Finally, some asymmetry

The following permutations yield new non-trivial reducts. preserving the order whilst flipping the graph relation below some irrational.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-132
SLIDE 132

Finally, some asymmetry

The following permutations yield new non-trivial reducts. preserving the order whilst flipping the graph relation below some irrational. preserving the order whilst flipping the graph relation above some irrational.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-133
SLIDE 133

Finally, some asymmetry

The following permutations yield new non-trivial reducts. preserving the order whilst flipping the graph relation below some irrational. preserving the order whilst flipping the graph relation above some irrational. There are no “dual” permutations of these.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-134
SLIDE 134

Finally, some asymmetry

The following permutations yield new non-trivial reducts. preserving the order whilst flipping the graph relation below some irrational. preserving the order whilst flipping the graph relation above some irrational. There are no “dual” permutations of these. Lemma The random ordered graph has at least 31+2=33 reducts.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-135
SLIDE 135

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-136
SLIDE 136

Theorem (Bodirsky+MP+Pongrácz ’13) The random ordered graph has 41 reducts.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-137
SLIDE 137

Theorem (Bodirsky+MP+Pongrácz ’13) The random ordered graph has 41 reducts.

1 4 5 3 2 6 7 9 11 13 10 12 14 8 18 15 16 17 27 23 24 25 26 28 29 30 31 32 19 20 21 22 34 33 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 Aut(E,<) (sw,turn) (-,lr) (id,lr) (id,turn) (sw,id) (-,id) Aut(E,sep) Aut(E) Aut(<) Aut(sep) Aut(R(5)) Aut(R(5),<) Aut(T)

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-138
SLIDE 138

Part III: Discussion of The Answer

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-139
SLIDE 139

Discussion

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-140
SLIDE 140

Discussion

We have learnt from the result:

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-141
SLIDE 141

Discussion

We have learnt from the result: similarities between the symmetries of the order and the graph

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-142
SLIDE 142

Discussion

We have learnt from the result: similarities between the symmetries of the order and the graph nonetheless their combination yields an asymmetry

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-143
SLIDE 143

Discussion

We have learnt from the result: similarities between the symmetries of the order and the graph nonetheless their combination yields an asymmetry we cannot calculate the reducts of a superposed structure from its factors

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-144
SLIDE 144

Discussion

We have learnt from the result: similarities between the symmetries of the order and the graph nonetheless their combination yields an asymmetry we cannot calculate the reducts of a superposed structure from its factors On a technical level:

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-145
SLIDE 145

Discussion

We have learnt from the result: similarities between the symmetries of the order and the graph nonetheless their combination yields an asymmetry we cannot calculate the reducts of a superposed structure from its factors On a technical level:

  • ur Ramsey-theoretic method is quite efficient

(first classification of free superposition)

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-146
SLIDE 146

Discussion

We have learnt from the result: similarities between the symmetries of the order and the graph nonetheless their combination yields an asymmetry we cannot calculate the reducts of a superposed structure from its factors On a technical level:

  • ur Ramsey-theoretic method is quite efficient

(first classification of free superposition) improved it to reduce work to the join irreducible elements

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-147
SLIDE 147

Discussion

We have learnt from the result: similarities between the symmetries of the order and the graph nonetheless their combination yields an asymmetry we cannot calculate the reducts of a superposed structure from its factors On a technical level:

  • ur Ramsey-theoretic method is quite efficient

(first classification of free superposition) improved it to reduce work to the join irreducible elements

  • ur method is not sporadic (same for order, graph, tournament)

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-148
SLIDE 148

1 4 5 3 2 6 7 9 11 13 10 12 14 8 18 15 16 17 27 23 24 25 26 28 29 30 31 32 19 20 21 22 34 33 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 Aut(E,<) (sw,turn) (-,lr) (id,lr) (id,turn) (sw,id) (-,id) Aut(E,sep) Aut(E) Aut(<) Aut(sep) Aut(R(5)) Aut(R(5),<) Aut(T)

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-149
SLIDE 149

Ramsey structures

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-150
SLIDE 150

Ramsey structures

Definition (Ramsey structure ∆)

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-151
SLIDE 151

Ramsey structures

Definition (Ramsey structure ∆) For all finite substructures P, H of ∆: Whenever we color the copies of P in ∆ with 2 colors then there is a monochromatic copy of H in ∆.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-152
SLIDE 152

Ramsey structures

Definition (Ramsey structure ∆) For all finite substructures P, H of ∆: Whenever we color the copies of P in ∆ with 2 colors then there is a monochromatic copy of H in ∆.

P P

Δ

H

P P P P P P P P

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-153
SLIDE 153

Ramsey structures

Definition (Ramsey structure ∆) For all finite substructures P, H of ∆: Whenever we color the copies of P in ∆ with 2 colors then there is a monochromatic copy of H in ∆.

P P

Δ

H

P P P P P P P P

Theorem (Nešetˇ ril-Rödl) The random ordered graph is Ramsey.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-154
SLIDE 154

Canonical functions

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-155
SLIDE 155

Canonical functions

Definition Let ∆, Λ be structures. f : ∆ → Λ is canonical iff for all tuples (x1, . . . , xn), (y1, . . . , yn) of the same type in ∆ (f(x1), . . . , f(xn)) and (f(y1), . . . , f(yn)) have the same type in Λ.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-156
SLIDE 156

Canonical functions

Definition Let ∆, Λ be structures. f : ∆ → Λ is canonical iff for all tuples (x1, . . . , xn), (y1, . . . , yn) of the same type in ∆ (f(x1), . . . , f(xn)) and (f(y1), . . . , f(yn)) have the same type in Λ. Examples on (D; <, E)

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-157
SLIDE 157

Canonical functions

Definition Let ∆, Λ be structures. f : ∆ → Λ is canonical iff for all tuples (x1, . . . , xn), (y1, . . . , yn) of the same type in ∆ (f(x1), . . . , f(xn)) and (f(y1), . . . , f(yn)) have the same type in Λ. Examples on (D; <, E) self-embeddings

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-158
SLIDE 158

Canonical functions

Definition Let ∆, Λ be structures. f : ∆ → Λ is canonical iff for all tuples (x1, . . . , xn), (y1, . . . , yn) of the same type in ∆ (f(x1), . . . , f(xn)) and (f(y1), . . . , f(yn)) have the same type in Λ. Examples on (D; <, E) self-embeddings reversing <, preserving edges and non-edges

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-159
SLIDE 159

Canonical functions

Definition Let ∆, Λ be structures. f : ∆ → Λ is canonical iff for all tuples (x1, . . . , xn), (y1, . . . , yn) of the same type in ∆ (f(x1), . . . , f(xn)) and (f(y1), . . . , f(yn)) have the same type in Λ. Examples on (D; <, E) self-embeddings reversing <, preserving edges and non-edges preserving <, flipping edges and non-edges

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-160
SLIDE 160

Canonical functions

Definition Let ∆, Λ be structures. f : ∆ → Λ is canonical iff for all tuples (x1, . . . , xn), (y1, . . . , yn) of the same type in ∆ (f(x1), . . . , f(xn)) and (f(y1), . . . , f(yn)) have the same type in Λ. Examples on (D; <, E) self-embeddings reversing <, preserving edges and non-edges preserving <, flipping edges and non-edges preserving <, send to clique

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-161
SLIDE 161

Canonizing functions on Ramsey structures

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-162
SLIDE 162

Canonizing functions on Ramsey structures

Magical proposition (Bodirsky+MP+Tsankov ’11) Let ∆ is ordered Ramsey homogeneous finite language f : ∆ → ∆ c1, . . . , cn ∈ ∆.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-163
SLIDE 163

Canonizing functions on Ramsey structures

Magical proposition (Bodirsky+MP+Tsankov ’11) Let ∆ is ordered Ramsey homogeneous finite language f : ∆ → ∆ c1, . . . , cn ∈ ∆. Then the closed monoid generated by {f} ∪ Aut(∆) contains a function g which

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-164
SLIDE 164

Canonizing functions on Ramsey structures

Magical proposition (Bodirsky+MP+Tsankov ’11) Let ∆ is ordered Ramsey homogeneous finite language f : ∆ → ∆ c1, . . . , cn ∈ ∆. Then the closed monoid generated by {f} ∪ Aut(∆) contains a function g which is canonical as a function from (∆, c1, . . . , cn) to ∆ agrees with f on {c1, . . . , cn}.

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-165
SLIDE 165

Canonizing functions on Ramsey structures

Magical proposition (Bodirsky+MP+Tsankov ’11) Let ∆ is ordered Ramsey homogeneous finite language f : ∆ → ∆ c1, . . . , cn ∈ ∆. Then the closed monoid generated by {f} ∪ Aut(∆) contains a function g which is canonical as a function from (∆, c1, . . . , cn) to ∆ agrees with f on {c1, . . . , cn}. Note:

  • nly finitely many different behaviors of canonical functions.

g, g′ same behavior → generate one another (with Aut(∆)).

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-166
SLIDE 166

1 4 5 3 2 6 7 9 11 13 10 12 14 8 18 15 16 17 27 23 24 25 26 28 29 30 31 32 19 20 21 22 34 33 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 Aut(E,<) (sw,turn) (-,lr) (id,lr) (id,turn) (sw,id) (-,id) Aut(E,sep) Aut(E) Aut(<) Aut(sep) Aut(R(5)) Aut(R(5),<) Aut(T)

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-167
SLIDE 167

BLAST

Boolean algebras Lattices Universal Algebra Set theory Topology

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-168
SLIDE 168

BLAST

Boolean algebras Lattices Universal Algebra Set theory Topology

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-169
SLIDE 169

Part IV: The Question to The Answer

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-170
SLIDE 170

The Question

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-171
SLIDE 171

The Question

Problem Suppose that ∆1, ∆2 have finitely many reducts. Does their free superposition have finitely many reducts?

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-172
SLIDE 172

The Question

Problem Suppose that ∆1, ∆2 have finitely many reducts. Does their free superposition have finitely many reducts? (Example: random permutation (D; <, ≺))

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-173
SLIDE 173

The Question

Problem Suppose that ∆1, ∆2 have finitely many reducts. Does their free superposition have finitely many reducts? (Example: random permutation (D; <, ≺)) Problem Suppose that ∆ is homogeneous in a finite relational language. Does it have a finite homogeneous extension which is Ramsey?

42 Michael Pinsker

slide-174
SLIDE 174

Thank you!

1 4 5 3 2 6 7 9 11 13 10 12 14 8 18 15 16 17 27 23 24 25 26 28 29 30 31 32 19 20 21 22 34 33 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 Aut(E,<) (sw,turn) (-,lr) (id,lr) (id,turn) (sw,id) (-,id) Aut(E,sep) Aut(E) Aut(<) Aut(sep) Aut(R(5)) Aut(R(5),<) Aut(T)

“The Answer to the Great Question. . . Of Life, the Universe and Everything. . . Is. . . Forty-two,” said Deep Thought, with infinite majesty and calm.

Douglas Adams

42 Michael Pinsker