Fine analysis of the quasi-orderings on the power set (Q5959740)

Let \((Q,\preceq)\) be a quasi-ordered set, \({\mathfrak P}(Q)\) its power set, \({\mathfrak P}_f(Q)\) the set of its finite subsets, and \({\mathfrak P}_c(Q)\) the set of all countable subsets of \(Q\). For \(X,Y\in{\mathfrak P}(Q)\) we put \(X\preceq^\exists_\forall Y\) if each \(x\in X\) is majorized by some \(y\in Y\), and \(X\preceq^\forall_\exists Y\) if each \(y\in Y\) is minorized by some \(x\in X\). Let \([{\mathbf N}]^{<\omega}\) resp. \([{\mathbf N}]^\omega\) be the set of all finite resp. infinite subsets of the set \({\mathbf N}\) of natural numbers. A set \(B\subseteq [{\mathbf N}]^{<\omega}\) is called a block if (i) \(B\) is infinite, (ii) \(\forall X\in [\bigcup B]^\omega\) \(\exists s\in B\) such that \(s\) is a proper initial segment of \(X\), and (iii) \(\forall s,t\in B\Rightarrow s\) is no proper initial segment of \(t\). \(B\) is called a barrier if it satisfies (i) and (ii) and (iii)\('\) \(\forall s,t\in B\Rightarrow s\) is no proper initial segment of \(t\). And a barrier \(B\) is called smooth if for all \(s,t\in B\) with the length \(l(s)\) of \(s\) less than \(l(t)\) there exists \(i< l(s)\) such that \(s(i)< t(i)\). For a countable ordinal \(\alpha\) and a quasi-order \(\preceq\) on \(Q\) this \(\preceq\) is said to be \(\alpha\)-wqo (wqo abbreviates well-quasi-ordered) if for every barrier \(B\) with order type \(\leq\alpha\) every map \(f: B\to Q\) is good with respect to \(\preceq\). (If \(\preceq\) is an \(\alpha\)-wqo for every countable \(\alpha\), then \(\preceq\) is a bqo (= better-quasi-order).) Then the main result of the paper is that for any quasi-ordered set \((Q,\preceq)\) and any infinite countable indecomposable ordinal \(\alpha\) the following are equivalent: (i) \(Q\) is \((\alpha\bullet \omega)\)-wqo with respect to \(\preceq\), (ii) \({\mathfrak P}(Q)\) is \(\alpha\)-wqo with respect to \(\preceq^\exists_\forall\), (iii) \({\mathfrak P}_c(Q)\) is \(\alpha\)-wqo with respect to \(\preceq^\exists_\forall\), (iv) \({\mathfrak P}(Q)\) is \(\alpha\)-wqo with respect to \(\preceq^\forall_\exists\), (v) \({\mathfrak P}_f(Q)\) is \(\alpha\)-wqo with respect to \(\preceq^\forall_\exists\). This then implies also the equivalence of the statements which arise from the before-mentioned by exchanging \(\alpha\)-wqo by better-quasi-orered. A negative answer to the following question of Abdulla is obtained: If \(Q\) is wqo with respect to \(\preceq\), does this imply that \({\mathfrak P}_f(Q)\) is wqo with respect to \(\preceq^\forall_\exists\)?