Explicit Substitution - History

History

Explicit substitutions grew out of an ‘implementation trick’ used, for example, by AUTOMATH, and became a respectable syntactic theory in lambda calculus and rewriting theory. The idea of a specific calculus where substitutions are part of the object language, and not of the informal meta-theory, is credited to Abadi, Cardelli, Curien, and Levy. Their seminal paper on the λσ calculus explains that implementations of lambda calculus need to be very careful when dealing with substitutions. Without sophisticated mechanisms for structure-sharing, substitutions can cause a size explosion, and therefore, in practice, substitutions are delayed and explicitly recorded. This makes the correspondence between the theory and the implementation highly non-trivial and correctness of implementations can be hard to establish. One solution is to make the substitutions part of the calculus, that is, to have a calculus of explicit substitutions.

Once substitution has been made explicit, however, the basic properties of substitution change from being semantic to syntactic properties. One most important example is the "substitution lemma", which with the notation of λx becomes

  • (M〈x:=N〉)〈y:=P〉 = (M〈y:=P〉)〈x:=(N〈y:=P〉)〉 (where x≠y and x not free in P)

A surprising counterexample, due to Melliès, shows that the way this rule is encoded in the original calculus of explicit substitutions is not strongly normalizing. Following this, a multitude of calculi were described trying to offer the best compromise between syntactic properties of explicit substitution calculi.

Read more about this topic:  Explicit Substitution

Famous quotes containing the word history:

    You treat world history as a mathematician does mathematics, in which nothing but laws and formulas exist, no reality, no good and evil, no time, no yesterday, no tomorrow, nothing but an eternal, shallow, mathematical present.
    Hermann Hesse (1877–1962)

    To summarize the contentions of this paper then. Firstly, the phrase ‘the meaning of a word’ is a spurious phrase. Secondly and consequently, a re-examination is needed of phrases like the two which I discuss, ‘being a part of the meaning of’ and ‘having the same meaning.’ On these matters, dogmatists require prodding: although history indeed suggests that it may sometimes be better to let sleeping dogmatists lie.
    —J.L. (John Langshaw)

    Racism is an ism to which everyone in the world today is exposed; for or against, we must take sides. And the history of the future will differ according to the decision which we make.
    Ruth Benedict (1887–1948)