2406.12777
Medvedev degrees of subshifts on groups
Sebastián Barbieri, Nicanor Carrasco-Vargas
correctmedium confidence
- Category
- math.DS
- Journal tier
- Strong Field
- Processed
- Sep 28, 2025, 12:56 AM
- arXiv Links
- Abstract ↗PDF ↗
Audit review
The paper proves the dichotomy for virtually polycyclic G—MSFT(G)={0M} if G is virtually cyclic, and otherwise all Π0^1 degrees—by combining (i) commensurability invariance to reduce the virtually cyclic case to Z, and (ii) a subgroup-to-group transference principle (Corollary 4.5) from Z^2≤G together with Simpson’s theorem and an upper Π0^1 bound (Observation 3.5). This is stated precisely in Theorem 5.4 and its proof. The candidate solution reaches the identical classification via an explicit construction: it directly recodes along a finite-index Z-subaction in the virtually cyclic case, and in the non-virtually-cyclic case induces an SFT on G that simulates a Z^2-SFT on each left coset, then shows Medvedev equivalence using computable coset representatives (available in polycyclic groups). The approaches differ in packaging—abstract transfer results in the paper versus a hands-on coset-wise construction in the model—but the conclusions and required hypotheses coincide. Minor clarifications the model could add are: nearest-neighbor recoding for 2D SFTs and explicitly invoking that the Π0^1 pullback bound needs recursive presentability (which polycyclic groups have). Overall, both are correct and consistent with the paper’s framework. See Theorem 5.4, Corollary 4.5/Proposition 4.7, Theorem 5.1, and Observation 3.5 in the paper .
Referee report (LaTeX)
\textbf{Recommendation:} minor revisions \textbf{Journal Tier:} strong field \textbf{Justification:} The paper delivers a clean classification of Medvedev degrees for SFTs on virtually polycyclic groups and develops general transfer tools of independent interest. The arguments are concise, rely on well-established results, and appear correct under the stated hypotheses. Minor clarifications regarding computational assumptions (recursive presentability, decidable membership) would make the exposition even clearer. The contribution is meaningful within symbolic dynamics and computability theory.