logo       

question on formalism B: msg#00007

science.mathematics.frogs

Subject: question on formalism B


Hi Frogs,

I have a question, addressed in particular to those working on
"Formalism B", which is still somehow a mystery to me. I have some good understanding of what should be identified, but not of what SHOULD NOT be identified.

Can someone give me a simple example of two derivations that are not identified by "Formalism B", but are identified by proof nets (the N-nets of our TLCA-paper) ?

I guess that

([A,B],[C,D])
s ---------------
[A,(B,[C,D])]
s ---------------
[A,[(B,C),D]]

vs.

([A,B],[C,D])
s ---------------
[([A,B],C),D]
s ---------------
[[A,(B,C)],D]
= ---------------
[A,[(B,C),D]]

should be the typical example. The two derivations above are identified by proof nets. But not by B, are they? Am I right or wrong about this?

In any case, an answer would also help clarifying the relation to categorical coherence.

Maybe we should introduce a third type of bureaucracy: Type C.
"Formalism C" then identifies the two derivations above.
The theorem would be

"Formalism C" = proof nets = cat. coherence

Does this make sense?

-Lutz




<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Google Custom Search

News | FAQ | advertise