3
$\begingroup$

Let $f:[0,1]\to\mathbb R$ be an arbitrary function. It is well known that if $f$ is of Baire Class 1, then the points at which $f$ is continuous form a dense subset of $[0,1]$. My question now is, if the converse is true:

Let $f$ be continuous at each point of a dense subset of $[0,1]$. Is then $f$ necessarily of Baire Class 1?

I guess not, and I would like to see some references showing a counter example or, even better, some book/paper answering this and the following question:

If the answer to the above question is negative, what additional property on $f$ is needed to guarantee that $f$ is of Baire Class 1?

I suppose that the set of continuity in a certain sense has to be bigger than just dense.

Any help is highly appreciated. Thank you in advance!

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ It's automatically somewhat "bigger"; the set of continuity is always $G_\delta$, so if it is dense then it is comeager and in particular (by Baire category) not meager. $\endgroup$ – Nate Eldredge Sep 8 '17 at 19:39
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ See this. It's just a stronger result. $\endgroup$ – MathematicsStudent1122 Sep 8 '17 at 20:19
2
$\begingroup$

See the first example at Examples of Baire class 2 functions; you put a continuous "sawtooth" of height 1 in each of the intervals in the complement of the Cantor set $C$. Then it is continuous at every point of $C^c$ and discontinuous at every point of $C$. However, a Baire class 1 function restricted to any perfect set has a comeager continuity set, so this function is not Baire class 1. (It is Baire class 2.)

Also see Maximum Baire class of a Riemann integrable function for a function which is continuous at each point of a dense set, but is not even Borel: just consider $1_B$ where $B$ is any non-Borel subset of the Cantor set. (Thanks to MathematicsStudent1122 for suggesting this in a comment.)

For a result in the other direction, it seems to be true that if the continuity set is co-countable (i.e. the discontinuity set is countable) then the function is Baire class 1. This appears as Exercise 24.17 in Kechris, Classical Descriptive Set Theory, but I can't solve it off the top of my head. None of the other notions of "big set" seem to help; the examples above show that it is not sufficient for the continuity set to be comeager or full measure (or both).

| cite | improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$

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.