Lachlan observed that any nonzero d.c.e. degree bounds a nonzero c.e. degree. In this paper, we study the c.e. predecessors of d.c.e. degrees, and prove that given a nonzero d.c.e. degree , there is a c.e. degree below and a high d.c.e. degree such that bounds all the c.e. degrees below . This result gives a unified approach to some seemingly unrelated results. In particular, it has the following two known theorems as corollaries: there is a low c.e. degree isolating (...) a high d.c.e. degree [S. Ishmukhametov, G. Wu, Isolation and the high/low hierarchy, Arch. Math. Logic 41 259–266]; there is a high d.c.e. degree bounding no minimal pairs [C.T. Chong, A. Li, Y. Yang, The existence of high nonbounding degrees in the difference hierarchy, Ann. Pure Appl. Logic 138 31–51]. (shrink)

Examining various kinds of isolation phenomena in the Turing degrees, I show that there are, for every n>0, (n+1)-c.e. sets isolated in the n-CEA degrees by n-c.e. sets below them. For n≥1 such phenomena arise below any computably enumerable degree, and conjecture that this result holds densely in the c.e. degrees as well. Surprisingly, such isolation pairs also exist where the top set has high degree and the isolating set is low, although the complete situation for jump classes remains unknown.

This paper analyzes several properties of infima in Dn, the n-r.e. degrees. We first show that, for every n> 1, there are n-r.e. degrees a, b, and c, and an -r.e. degree x such that a < x < b, c and, in Dn, b c = a. We also prove a related result, namely that there are two d.r.e. degrees that form a minimal pair in Dn, for each n < ω, but that do not form a minimal pair (...) in Dω. Next, we show that every low r.e. degree branches in the d.r.e. degrees. This result does not extend to the low2 r.e. degrees. We also construct a non-low r.e. degree a such that every r.e. degree b a branches in the d.r.e. degrees. Finally we prove that the nonbranching degrees are downward dense in the d.r.e. degrees. (shrink)

In this paper, we study the bi-isolation phenomena in the d.c.e. degrees and prove that there are c.e. degrees c₁ < c₂ and a d.c.e. degree d ∈ (c₁, c₂) such that (c₁, d) and (d, c₂) contain no c.e. degrees. Thus, the c.e. degrees between c₁ and c₂ are all incomparable with d. We also show that there are d.c.e. degrees d₁ < d₂ such that (d₁, d₂) contains a unique c.e. degree.

We provide three new results about interpolating 2-r.e. or 2-REA degrees between given r.e. degrees: Proposition 1.13. If c h are r.e. , c is low and h is high, then there is an a h which is REA in c but not r.e. Theorem 2.1. For all high r.e. degrees h g there is a properly d-r.e. degree a such that h a g and a is r.e. in h . Theorem 3.1. There is an incomplete nonrecursive r.e. A (...) such that every set REA in A and recursive in 0′ is of r. e. degree. The first proof is a variation on the construction of Soare and Stob . The second combines highness with a modified version of the proof strategy of Cooper et al. . The third theorem is a rather surprising result with a somewhat unusual proof strategy. Its proof is a 0‴ argument that at times moves left in the tree so that the accessible nodes are not linearly ordered at each stage. Thus the construction lacks a true path in the usual sense. Two substitute notions fill this role: The true nodes are the leftmost ones accessible infinitely often; the semitrue nodes are the leftmost ones such that there are infinitely many stages at which some extension is accessible. Another unusual feature of the construction is that it involves using distinct priority orderings to control the interactions of different parts of the construction. (shrink)

In this paper, we study the bi-isolation phenomena in the d.c.e. degrees and prove that there are c.e. degrees c1 < c2 and a d.c.e. degree d∈ such that and contain no c.e. degrees. Thus, the c.e. degrees between c1 and c2 are all incomparable with d. We also show that there are d.c.e. degrees d1 < d2 such that contains a unique c.e. degree.

We show that for any computably enumerable set A and any equation image set L, if L is low and equation image, then there is a c.e. splitting equation image such that equation image. In Particular, if L is low and n-c.e., then equation image is n-c.e. and hence there is no low maximal n-c.e. degree.