PROOF-THEORETIC RELATIONS BETWEEN HIGMAN’S AND KRUSKAL’S THEOREM, AND INDEPENDENCE RESULTS FOR TREE-LIKE STRUCTURES

Abstract Higman’s lemma and Kruskal’s theorem are two of the most celebrated results in the theory of well quasi-orders. In his seminal paper G. Higman obtained what is known as Higman’s lemma as a corollary of a more general theorem, dubbed here as Higman’s theorem. While the lemma deals with finite sequences over a well quasi-order, the theorem is about abstract operations of arbitrarily high arity. J. B. Kruskal was fully aware of this broader framework: in his seminal paper, he not only applied Higman’s lemma at crucial points of his proof but also followed Higman’s proof schema. At the conclusion of the article, Kruskal noted that Higman’s theorem is a special case—restricted to trees of finite degree—of his own tree theorem. Although he provided no formal reduction, he included a glossary translating concepts between the tree and algebraic settings. The equivalence between these versions was later clarified by D. Schmidt and M. Pouzet. In this work, we revisit that equivalence to illuminate the proof-theoretical relationships between the two theorems within the base system RCA 0 $_0$ Subscript 0 of reverse mathematics. Moreover, some independence results over first- and second-order theories are treated. In particular, tree-like structures, involving either Ackermannian terms or exponential expressions, are studied unveiling well-foundedness properties that are independent from Peano arithmetic and relevant fragments of second-order arithmetic.