English

Borel Canonization of Analytic Sets with Borel Sections

Logic 2016-05-31 v3

Abstract

Given an analytic equivalence relation, we tend to wonder whether it is Borel. When it is non Borel, there is always the hope it will be Borel on a "large" set -- nonmeager or of positive measure. That has led Kanovei, Sabok and Zapletal to ask whether every proper σ\sigma ideal satisfies the following property: given EE an analytic equivalence relation with Borel classes, there exists a set BB which is Borel and II-positive such that EBE\restriction_{B} is Borel. We propose a related problem -- does every proper σ\sigma ideal satisfy: given AA an analytic subset of the plane with Borel sections, there exists a set BB which is Borel and II-positive such that A(B×ωω)A\cap(B\times\omega^{\omega}) is Borel. We answer positively when a measurable cardinal exists, and negatively in LL, where no proper σ\sigma ideal has that property. Assuming ω1\omega_{1} is inaccessible to the reals but not Mahlo in LL, we construct a ccc σ\sigma ideal II not having this property -- in fact, forcing with II adds a non Borel section to a certain analytic set with Borel sections, and a non Borel class to a certain analytic equivalence relation with Borel classes. Various counterexamples are given for the case of a Δ21\mathbf{\Delta_{2}^{1}} equivalence relation as well as for the case of an improper ideal.

Cite

@article{arxiv.1512.06368,
  title  = {Borel Canonization of Analytic Sets with Borel Sections},
  author = {Ohad Drucker},
  journal= {arXiv preprint arXiv:1512.06368},
  year   = {2016}
}
R2 v1 2026-06-22T12:14:19.873Z