First some definitions. By $\mathcal P(\mathbb N)$ we denote the family of all subsets of $\mathbb N$ endowed with the metrizable separable topology generated by the countable base consisting of the sets $[A;B]=\{C\subset \mathbb N:C\cap B=A\}$ where $A,B$ run over finite subsets of $\mathbb N$.

A subfamily $\mathcal F\subset\mathcal P(\mathbb N)$ is called hereditary if for any sets $F\in\mathcal F$ each subset of $F$ belongs to $\mathcal F$.

An ideal on $\mathbb N$ is a hereditary subfamily $\mathcal I\subset \mathcal P(\mathbb N)$, closed under unions.

An ideal $\mathcal I$ on $\mathbb N$ is called an $F_{\sigma\delta}$-ideal if $\mathcal I=\bigcap_{n=1}^\infty\bigcup_{m=1}^\infty\mathcal K_{n,m}$ for some closed subsets $\mathcal K_{n,m}$ of the compact topological space $\mathcal P(\mathbb N)$.

Problem 1. Can each $F_{\sigma\delta}$-ideal $\mathcal I\subset\mathcal P(\mathbb N)$ be written as $\mathcal I=\bigcap_{n=1}^\infty\bigcup_{m=1}^\infty\mathcal K_{n,m}$ for some hereditary closed subsets $\mathcal K_{n,m}$ of the compact topological space $\mathcal P(\mathbb N)$?

We can ask also a more general

Problem 2. Can each hereditary $F_{\sigma\delta}$-set $\mathcal I\subset\mathcal P(\mathbb N)$ be written as $\mathcal I=\bigcap_{n=1}^\infty\bigcup_{m=1}^\infty\mathcal K_{n,m}$ for some hereditary closed subsets $\mathcal K_{n,m}$ of the compact topological space $\mathcal P(\mathbb N)$?

Problem 2 is a related to another open (?)

Problem 3. Does each Borel hereditary subset $\mathcal F\subset\mathcal P(\mathbb N)$ belong to the smallest subfamily of $\mathcal P(\mathbb N)$ containing all open hereditary sets and closed under taking countable unions and intersections?

  • $\begingroup$ The topology described in the post is the same as identifying $\mathcal P(\mathbb N)$ with the Cantor space $\mathcal C=\{0,1\}^{\mathbb N}$, right? (Here $\{0,1\}$ has the discrete topology and we take the product topology on $\mathcal C$.) $\endgroup$ – Martin Sleziak Oct 13 '17 at 13:51
  • $\begingroup$ @MartinSleziak Yes. This is the same topology (= pointwise convergence = Tychonoff product topology). $\endgroup$ – Taras Banakh Oct 13 '17 at 14:00

In [1], Solecki proved (Theorem 2.1 combined with Lemma 2.4),

Theorem: $\mathcal{I} \subset \mathcal{P}(\mathbb{N})$ is an analytic P-ideal, if and only if, there is some $\varphi:\mathcal{P}(\mathbb{N})\rightarrow [0,\infty)$ satisfying the following,

  • $\varphi(\emptyset) = 0$,
  • $\varphi(A) \le \varphi(A \cup B) \le \varphi(A) + \varphi(B)$, and
  • $\varphi(A) = \lim_{n\rightarrow \infty} \varphi(A\cap n)$,

such that $\mathcal{I} = \{ A \subset \mathbb{N}: \limsup_{n} \varphi(A \backslash n)=0\}$. Furthermore, every analytic ideal on $\mathbb{N}$ is either a $P$-ideal, or finite-to-one reducible to the ideal generated by finite unions of the sets $\{ n\} \times \mathbb{N}.$

Remark: Any $\varphi$ which satisfies the hypothesis of the theorem is called a lower semi-continuous sub-measure on $\mathbb{N}$.

An easy corollary to the previous theorem provides a partial answer to Problem 1.

Every $F_{\sigma\delta}$ $P$-ideal on $\mathbb{N}$ can be written as $\bigcap_n \bigcup_m K_{n,m}$ for some closed and hereditary $K_{n,m}$.

Proof: Using the previous theorem, it follows that for each $F_{\sigma\delta}$ P-ideal $\mathcal{I}$ there is a lower semi-continuous $\varphi$ such that $\mathcal{I} = \{ A \subset \mathbb{N} : \limsup_{n} \varphi(A\backslash n) = 0\}$. Letting $K_{n,m} = \{ A \subset \mathbb{N}: \varphi(A\backslash m) \le \frac{1}{n} \}$, we have $\mathcal{I} = \bigcap_n \bigcup_m K_{n,m}$; so it only remains to show that each $K_{n,m}$ is closed and hereditary.

To this end note that, for each $A \in K_{n,m}$ and $B\subset A$ we have $B\backslash m \subset A\backslash m$, therefore using the properties of $\varphi$, it follows that, $\varphi(B\backslash m) \le \varphi(B\backslash m \cup A\backslash m)=\varphi(A\backslash m) \le \frac{1}{n}$ and so $B \in K_{n,m}.$

Next, assume $A \subset \mathbb{N}$ has the property that for every $k \in \mathbb{N}$ letting $a_k = A \cap k$ and $b_k =k$, we have $[a_k, b_k]\cap K_{n,m} \neq \emptyset$. Then, for every $k \ge 0$, $\varphi(a_k \backslash m) \le \frac{1}{n}$ (since the sequence is increasing.) It immediately follows that $\varphi(A \backslash m) = \lim_{k} \varphi(a_k \backslash m) \le \frac{1}{n}$ and $A \in K_{n,m}$.

[1] Solecki, Sławomir, Analytic ideals and their applications, Ann. Pure Appl. Logic 99, No.1-3, 51-72 (1999). ZBL0932.03060.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ If we take any decomposition $\bigcup_{i\in\mathbb N} A_i=\mathbb N$ of $\mathbb N$ into countably many disjoint infinite subsets, then $$\mathcal I=\{A\subseteq \mathbb N; A\text{ intersects only finitely many $A_i$'s}\}$$ is not a P-ideal and it is $F_\sigma$.So the remark at the end of the current revision of the post ("it's possible that all $F_{\sigma\delta}$ ideals are P-ideals, but I'm not sure") is not true. $\endgroup$ – Martin Sleziak Mar 16 '18 at 19:51
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @MartinSleziak Yes, of course you are right. I was implicitly restricting to ideals which are $F_{\sigma\delta}$ and not $F_{\sigma}$; since every $F_\sigma$ ideal has a closed hereditary presentation. $\endgroup$ – Not Mike Mar 16 '18 at 20:20
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Thie ideal pointed by Martin Sleziak can be "mixed" with some other $F_{\sigma\delta}$ ideal which is not $F_\sigma$ and the resulting ideal will be $F_{\sigma\delta}$ but not $F_\sigma$ and not a $P$-ideal. $\endgroup$ – Taras Banakh Mar 17 '18 at 9:13
  • $\begingroup$ @TarasBanakh Thank you for pointing that out. I guess I was confusing, not coverable by an $F_\sigma$ subideal with all countably generated sub-ideals being trivial; which now I that I say it, seems ridiculous. Anyway I've removed the remark at the end. $\endgroup$ – Not Mike Mar 18 '18 at 14:40

Let $\mathcal{I}$ be an $F_{\sigma \delta}$-set (not necessarily hereditary) in $\mathcal{P}(\mathbf{N})$, i.e., there exist a family of closed sets $\{F_{n,m}: n,m \in \mathbf{N}\}$ such that $$ \mathcal{I}=\bigcup_{n\ge 1}\bigcap_{m\ge 1}F_{n,m}. $$ Since $\mathcal{P}(\mathbf{N})$ is a zero-dimensional space with countable base $\mathcal{B}=\{B_k\}$ of clopen hereditary sets (made of cylinders), then it is easy to see that each $F_{n,m}$ can be written as finite union of countable intersection of elements in $\mathcal{B}$. Hence there exist $\{B_{n,m}(i,j): i\ge 1, j=1,\ldots,k\}\subseteq \mathcal{B}$ such that $$ F_{n,m}=\bigcup_{j=1}^k \bigcap_{i\ge 1} B_{n,m}(i,j). $$ for all $n,m$. Therefore $$ \begin{align} \mathcal{I}&=\bigcup_{n\ge 1}\bigcap_{m\ge 1}\bigcup_{j=1}^k \bigcap_{i\ge 1} B_{n,m}(i,j)\\ &=\bigcup_{n\ge 1}\bigcap_{m\ge 1}\bigcap_{i_1\ge 1} \cdots \bigcap_{i_k\ge 1}\left(B_{n,m}(i_1,1)\cup \cdots B_{n,m}(i_k,k)\right). \end{align} $$ Since finite unions of hereditary sets are hereditary, the answer to Problem 2 is affirmative.

  • $\begingroup$ The life is not so simple: the space $\mathcal P(\mathbb N)$ does not have a base consisting of hereditary sets: if it would be true, then we would get that each open set of $\mathcal P(\mathbb N)$ is hereditary and hence contains the empty set, which is not true. $\endgroup$ – Taras Banakh Oct 14 '17 at 9:41

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.