Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-dfsvx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T21:41:36.986Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Theoretical Pearls: Representing ‘undefined’ in lambda calculus

Part of: JFP Research Articles

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 November 2008

Henk Barendregt
Henk Barendregt
Affiliation:
Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science, Catholic University Nijmegen, Toernooiveld 1, 6525 ED, The Netherlands (e-mail: henk@cs.kun.nl)
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Let ψ be a partial recursive function (of one argument) with λ-defining term F∈Λ°. This means There are several proposals for what F⌜n⌝ should be in case ψ(n) is undefined: (1) a term without a normal form (Church); (2) an unsolvable term (Barendregt); (3) an easy term (Visser); (4) a term of order 0 (Statman).

These four possibilities will be covered by one ‘master’ result of Statman which is based on the ‘Anti Diagonal Normalization Theorem’ of Visser (1980). That ingenious theorem about precomplete numerations of Ershov is a powerful tool with applications in recursion theory, metamathematics of arithmetic and lambda calculus.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Functional Programming , Volume 2 , Issue 3 , July 1992 , pp. 367 - 374
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1992

References

Barendregt, H. P. 1971. Some extensional term models for lambda calculi and combinatory logics. PhD Thesis, Utrecht University.Google Scholar
Barendregt, H. P. 1984. The lambda calculus: its syntax and semantics. Revised edition, North-Holland.Google Scholar
Barendregt, H. P. 1991. Theoretical pearls: Self-interpretation in λ-calculus. J. Functional Program. 1 (2): 229–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernardi, C. and Sorbi, A. 1983. Classifying positive equivalence relations. J. Symbolic Logic, 48 (3): 529–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Church, A. 1941. The calculi of lambda conversion. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Ershov, Y. 1973. Theorie der Numerierungen. Z. Math. Logik Grundlagen Math., 19: 289–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kleene, S. C. 1936. λ-definability and recursiveness. Duke Math. J., 2: 340–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kleene, S. C. 1952. Introduction to metamathematics. North-Holland.Google Scholar
Mendelson, E. 1987. Introduction to mathematical logic. Third edition. Wadsworth & Brooks/Cole.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rogers, H. Jr 1967. Theory of recursive functions and effective computability. McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Statman, R. 1987. Two recursion theoretic problems in lambda calculus. Manuscript, Department of Mathematics, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, USA.Google Scholar
Statman, R. 1990. The Visser Fixed Point Theorem. Manuscript, Department of Mathematics, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, USA.Google Scholar
Visser, A. 1980. Numerations, λ-calculus & arithmetic. In: To H. B. Curry: Essays on Combinatory Logic, Lambda-Calculus and Formalism, eds. Hindley, J. R. and Seldin, J. P.Academic Press, 259–284.Google Scholar
Submit a response

Discussions

No Discussions have been published for this article.