5.3 Ehrenfeucht-Fraïssé games

Ehrenfeucht-Fraïssé games are a powerful tool for comparing mathematical structures. They involve two players, Spoiler and Duplicator, who take turns choosing elements from two structures to test their similarity.

These games connect directly to elementary equivalence by showing when structures can't be distinguished by first-order sentences. Winning strategies in the game translate to logical equivalence or difference between the structures being compared.

Ehrenfeucht-Fraïssé Games

Game Setup and Rules

Top images from around the web for Game Setup and Rules

• 

  Reasonably Well: What A Match View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  An elaborate dungeon setup | Is that Dwarven Forge terrain? … | Flickr View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Eggerland Mystery/Rounds 1-10 — StrategyWiki | Strategy guide and game reference wiki View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Reasonably Well: What A Match View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  An elaborate dungeon setup | Is that Dwarven Forge terrain? … | Flickr View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

Top images from around the web for Game Setup and Rules

• 

  Reasonably Well: What A Match View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  An elaborate dungeon setup | Is that Dwarven Forge terrain? … | Flickr View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Eggerland Mystery/Rounds 1-10 — StrategyWiki | Strategy guide and game reference wiki View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Reasonably Well: What A Match View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  An elaborate dungeon setup | Is that Dwarven Forge terrain? … | Flickr View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

• Ehrenfeucht-Fraïssé games involve two players (Spoiler and Duplicator) competing on a pair of mathematical structures (A and B)
• Game duration spans a predetermined number of rounds (n) corresponding to the quantifier depth of first-order sentences under consideration
• Each round consists of Spoiler selecting an element from either A or B, followed by Duplicator choosing an element from the opposite structure
• Player choices in each round construct a partial isomorphism between subsets of A and B
• Game board comprises structures A and B along with previously chosen elements
• Duplicator wins by maintaining a partial isomorphism between chosen elements of A and B after n rounds
• Spoiler achieves victory if the partial isomorphism condition breaks at any point during the game

Game Strategies and Structural Analysis

• Spoiler's winning strategy revolves around identifying a first-order sentence with quantifier depth n true in one structure but false in the other
• Duplicator aims to preserve structural similarities between chosen elements throughout all rounds
• Effective strategies for both players hinge on analyzing structural differences between given structures
• Back-and-forth systems play a crucial role in formulating Duplicator's winning strategies, particularly for infinite structures
• Duplicator's strategy development relies on identifying invariant properties persisting under partial isomorphism
• Number of rounds imposes limitations determining the complexity of distinguishable properties
• Recognizing symmetries and automorphisms within structures provides powerful tools for strategy construction, especially benefiting Duplicator

Winning Strategies in Games

Player-Specific Strategies

• Spoiler's strategy focuses on exploiting structural differences between A and B
• Duplicator's strategy aims to maintain structural similarities and preserve partial isomorphisms
• Spoiler seeks to force choices that reveal distinguishing properties between structures
• Duplicator attempts to mirror Spoiler's moves while preserving relational structures
• Strategies often involve analyzing substructures and their properties (subgraphs in graph structures)
• Players must consider both local and global structural properties in their decision-making

Strategic Considerations and Techniques

• Analyzing invariant properties under isomorphism guides strategy development (degree of vertices in graphs)
• Back-and-forth arguments help construct winning strategies for infinite structures
• Pebble game variations assist in visualizing and planning moves (colored pebbles representing chosen elements)
• Counting arguments prove useful in finite structure analysis (comparing sizes of specific subsets)
• Strategy adaptation based on opponent's moves crucial for both players
• Recognizing limitations imposed by game length influences long-term planning
• Identifying key structural elements that can be leveraged in later rounds (central nodes in graphs)

Games and Elementary Equivalence

Fundamental Theorem and Proof Outline

• Fundamental theorem states Duplicator's winning strategy for n-round game exists if and only if structures are elementarily equivalent up to quantifier depth n
• Proof demonstrates Spoiler's winning strategy corresponds to a distinguishing first-order sentence
• Duplicator's winning strategy implies agreement on all relevant sentences
• Partial isomorphisms in the game relate to preservation of truth values for atomic formulas and their negations
• Game rounds inductively correspond to quantifier depth in first-order formulas
• Proof requires showing game captures all relevant structural information up to given quantifier depth
• Understanding of first-order logic syntax and semantics essential for grasping game-equivalence connection

Logical and Structural Connections

• Game moves directly correspond to construction of first-order sentences
• Partial isomorphisms preserve truth values of atomic formulas between structures
• Each round represents a quantifier in the logical formula being constructed
• Game length n limits the complexity of expressible properties to quantifier depth n
• Winning strategies translate to logical equivalence or difference between structures
• Game captures notion of indistinguishability by first-order logic up to certain complexity
• Relationship between game and logic provides tool for analyzing expressive power of first-order logic

Establishing Equivalence with Games

Proving Equivalence and Non-Equivalence

• Establish elementary equivalence by constructing Duplicator's winning strategy for games of any finite length
• Demonstrate non-equivalence by finding specific number of rounds n and Spoiler's winning strategy for n-round game
• Identify characteristic properties expressible in first-order logic with limited quantifier depth
• Employ techniques like counting arguments, pebble games, and back-and-forth constructions for strategy development
• Recognize limitations of first-order logic (inability to express certain infinite concepts) when analyzing structures
• Identify common patterns leading to elementary equivalence (ω-saturation in infinite structures)
• Combine game-theoretic arguments with other model-theoretic techniques for complex cases

Practical Applications and Techniques

• Use games to prove equivalence of seemingly different structures (dense linear orders without endpoints)
• Apply games to show non-equivalence by constructing distinguishing sentences (finite vs. infinite structures)
• Analyze structures with symmetries or repetitive patterns using game strategies (periodic structures)
• Employ games to study properties of specific classes of structures (graphs, orders, algebraic structures)
• Utilize games in conjunction with other model-theoretic tools (compactness, Löwenheim-Skolem theorems)
• Apply game techniques to study definability and expressiveness in different logics
• Use games to construct counterexamples or show limitations of first-order logic (non-standard models of arithmetic)