On the strength of Ramsey's theorem for trees (Q2182273)

The authors prove that \(\mathsf{TT}^1\), the pigeonhole principle for trees, is \(\Pi^1_1\)-conservative over \(\mathsf{RCA}_0 +\mathsf{B}\Sigma^0_2 +\mathsf{P}\Sigma^0_1\). Consequently, \(\mathsf{RCA}_0 +\mathsf{TT}^1\) does not prove \(\mathsf{I}\Sigma^0_2\), answering a question of \textit{J. Chubb} et al. [J. Symb. Log. 74, No. 1, 201--215 (2009; Zbl 1162.03009)]. \textit{J. Corduan} et al. [J. Symb. Log. 75, No. 3, 945--954 (2010; Zbl 1203.03018)] proved that \(\mathsf{RCA}_0 + \mathsf{B}\Sigma^0_2\) cannot prove \(\mathsf{TT}^1\), so \(\mathsf{TT}^1\) lies strictly between \(\mathsf{B}\Sigma^0_2\) and \(\mathsf{I} \Sigma^0_2\) over \(\mathsf{RCA}_0\). The principle \(\mathsf{P}\Sigma^0_1\) of the main result is equivalent to the totality of Ackermann's function, as shown by \textit{A. P. Kreuzer} and \textit{K. Yokoyama} [J. Math. Log. 16, No. 1, Article ID 1650004, 21 p. (2016; Zbl 1436.03303)]. Open questions appearing in the final section of the paper include whether \(\mathsf{RCA}_0 + \mathsf{TT}^1\) implies \(\mathsf{P}\Sigma^0_1\), whether \(\mathsf{TT}^1\) is \(\Pi^1_1\)-conservative over \(\mathsf{RCA}_0 + \mathsf{B}\Sigma^0_2\), and whether \(\mathsf{RCA}_0 +\mathsf{RT}^2_2\) proves \(\mathsf{TT}^1\).