{"title":"论Lambda可定义性中的未定义和无意义","authors":"F. D. Vries","doi":"10.4230/LIPIcs.FSCD.2016.18","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We distinguish between undefined terms as used in lambda definability \nof partial recursive functions and meaningless terms as used in \ninfinite lambda calculus for the infinitary terms models that \ngeneralise the Bohm model. While there are uncountable many known \nsets of meaningless terms, there are four known sets of undefined \nterms. Two of these four are sets of meaningless terms. \n \nIn this paper we first present set of sufficient conditions for a set \nof lambda terms to serve as set of undefined terms in lambda \ndefinability of partial functions. The four known sets of undefined \nterms satisfy these conditions. \n \nNext we locate the smallest set of meaningless terms satisfying these \nconditions. This set sits very low in the lattice of all sets of \nmeaningless terms. Any larger set of meaningless terms than this \nsmallest set is a set of undefined terms. Thus we find uncountably \nmany new sets of undefined terms. \n \nAs an unexpected bonus of our careful analysis of lambda definability \nwe obtain a natural modification, strict lambda-definability, which \nallows for a Barendregt style of proof in which the representation of \ncomposition is truly the composition of representations.","PeriodicalId":284975,"journal":{"name":"International Conference on Formal Structures for Computation and Deduction","volume":"35 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On Undefined and Meaningless in Lambda Definability\",\"authors\":\"F. D. Vries\",\"doi\":\"10.4230/LIPIcs.FSCD.2016.18\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We distinguish between undefined terms as used in lambda definability \\nof partial recursive functions and meaningless terms as used in \\ninfinite lambda calculus for the infinitary terms models that \\ngeneralise the Bohm model. While there are uncountable many known \\nsets of meaningless terms, there are four known sets of undefined \\nterms. Two of these four are sets of meaningless terms. \\n \\nIn this paper we first present set of sufficient conditions for a set \\nof lambda terms to serve as set of undefined terms in lambda \\ndefinability of partial functions. The four known sets of undefined \\nterms satisfy these conditions. \\n \\nNext we locate the smallest set of meaningless terms satisfying these \\nconditions. This set sits very low in the lattice of all sets of \\nmeaningless terms. Any larger set of meaningless terms than this \\nsmallest set is a set of undefined terms. Thus we find uncountably \\nmany new sets of undefined terms. \\n \\nAs an unexpected bonus of our careful analysis of lambda definability \\nwe obtain a natural modification, strict lambda-definability, which \\nallows for a Barendregt style of proof in which the representation of \\ncomposition is truly the composition of representations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":284975,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Conference on Formal Structures for Computation and Deduction\",\"volume\":\"35 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-06-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Conference on Formal Structures for Computation and Deduction\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.FSCD.2016.18\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Conference on Formal Structures for Computation and Deduction","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.FSCD.2016.18","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
On Undefined and Meaningless in Lambda Definability
We distinguish between undefined terms as used in lambda definability
of partial recursive functions and meaningless terms as used in
infinite lambda calculus for the infinitary terms models that
generalise the Bohm model. While there are uncountable many known
sets of meaningless terms, there are four known sets of undefined
terms. Two of these four are sets of meaningless terms.
In this paper we first present set of sufficient conditions for a set
of lambda terms to serve as set of undefined terms in lambda
definability of partial functions. The four known sets of undefined
terms satisfy these conditions.
Next we locate the smallest set of meaningless terms satisfying these
conditions. This set sits very low in the lattice of all sets of
meaningless terms. Any larger set of meaningless terms than this
smallest set is a set of undefined terms. Thus we find uncountably
many new sets of undefined terms.
As an unexpected bonus of our careful analysis of lambda definability
we obtain a natural modification, strict lambda-definability, which
allows for a Barendregt style of proof in which the representation of
composition is truly the composition of representations.