Researcher profile

Andrej Muchnik

Andrej Muchnik contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 13 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
2works
0followers
4topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2012arXiv

Limit complexities revisited [once more]

The main goal of this article is to put some known results in a common perspective and to simplify their proofs. We start with a simple proof of a result of Vereshchagin saying that $\limsup_n C(x|n)$ equals $C^{0'}(x)$. Then we use the same argument to prove similar results for prefix complexity, a priori probability on binary tree, to prove Conidis' theorem about limits of effectively open sets, and also to improve the results of Muchnik about limit frequencies. As a by-product, we get a criterion of 2-randomness proved by Miller: a sequence $X$ is 2-random if and only if there exists $c$ such that any prefix $x$ of $X$ is a prefix of some string $y$ such that $C(y)\ge |y|-c$. (In the 1960ies this property was suggested in Kolmogorov as one of possible randomness definitions.) We also get another 2-randomness criterion by Miller and Nies: $X$ is 2-random if and only if $C(x)\ge |x|-c$ for some $c$ and infinitely many prefixes $x$ of $X$. This is a modified version of our old paper that contained a weaker (and cumbersome) version of Conidis' result, and the proof used low basis theorem (in quite a strange way). The full version was formulated there as a conjecture. This conjecture was later proved by Conidis. Bruno Bauwens (personal communication) noted that the proof can be obtained also by a simple modification of our original argument, and we reproduce Bauwens' argument with his permission.