Mathematicians normally assume the Axiom of Choice, which says you can always select one element from each set in a collection. Without this assumption, the familiar notion of "finite" splinters into many distinct flavors, called finiteness classes, that coincide when Choice holds but diverge without it. This paper studies several such finiteness classes that emerge from a branch of combinatorics called Ramsey theory, which broadly asks: given a large enough structure, must some orderly substructure always appear?
The first main result concerns a theorem by Gowers about block sequences of functions. Gowers' theorem comes in a family indexed by a parameter k, and a natural question was whether each value of k produces a genuinely different finiteness notion. The authors show the answer is no: the whole hierarchy collapses. Every level turns out to be equivalent to a single previously known class called H-finiteness, which captures sets whose collection of finite subsets is Dedekind-finite. This resolves an open question and shows that Gowers' theorem, despite its apparent complexity, is no more sensitive to the absence of Choice than a simpler combinatorial principle.
The second part of the paper examines two other Ramsey-type results, the Rainbow Ramsey theorem and the Canonical Ramsey theorem, which concern colorings of pairs or tuples from a set. The finiteness classes arising from failures of these theorems turn out to be genuinely distinct from each other and from the Gowers class, sitting inside the well-studied class of Dedekind-finite sets. The authors establish a network of containment relationships between these new classes and previously known ones, and they use a classical technique involving specially constructed set-theoretic models to analyze how the rainbow classes depend on their numerical parameters. Some finer questions about whether the containments are strict, and the full picture of the two-parameter rainbow family, remain open.