Not signed in (Sign In)

Not signed in

Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below

  • Sign in using OpenID

Site Tag Cloud

2-category 2-category-theory abelian-categories adjoint algebra algebraic algebraic-geometry algebraic-topology analysis analytic-geometry arithmetic arithmetic-geometry book bundles calculus categorical categories category category-theory chern-weil-theory cohesion cohesive-homotopy-type-theory cohomology colimits combinatorics complex complex-geometry computable-mathematics computer-science constructive cosmology deformation-theory descent diagrams differential differential-cohomology differential-equations differential-geometry digraphs duality elliptic-cohomology enriched fibration foundation foundations functional-analysis functor galois-theory gauge-theory gebra geometric-quantization geometry graph graphs gravity grothendieck group group-theory harmonic-analysis higher higher-algebra higher-category-theory higher-differential-geometry higher-geometry higher-lie-theory higher-topos-theory homological homological-algebra homotopy homotopy-theory homotopy-type-theory index-theory integration integration-theory k-theory lie-theory limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic mathematics measure-theory modal modal-logic model model-category-theory monad monads monoidal monoidal-category-theory morphism motives motivic-cohomology nlab noncommutative noncommutative-geometry number-theory of operads operator operator-algebra order-theory pages pasting philosophy physics planar pro-object probability probability-theory quantization quantum quantum-field quantum-field-theory quantum-mechanics quantum-physics quantum-theory question representation representation-theory riemannian-geometry scheme schemes set set-theory sheaf simplicial space spin-geometry stable-homotopy-theory stack string string-theory superalgebra supergeometry svg symplectic-geometry synthetic-differential-geometry terminology theory topology topos topos-theory tqft type type-theory universal variational-calculus

Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome to nForum
If you want to take part in these discussions either sign in now (if you have an account), apply for one now (if you don't).
    • CommentRowNumber1.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJan 13th 2021

    added pointer to:

    diff, v11, current

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorDmitri Pavlov
    • CommentTimeMar 26th 2021

    Transplanted the following comment:

    Martín Escardó writes on the nForum:

    The usual practice of domain theory papers and talks is to start by defining “domain” for the purposes of the paper or talk. It is a reusable word. Usually only compound words using the word “domain” have a fixed meaning, such as Scott domain (bounded complete algebraic dcpo), continuous Scott domain (bounded complete continuous dcpo), FS domain, SFP domain, L-domain. I wouldn’t use the plain word “domain” in a paper without first explicitly defining it, as it has been used with so many different meanings in the domain theory literature. Also the terminological conventions vary a bit depending on whether domain theory is used for the purposes of computation (e.g., programming language semantics, and theory of computability) or topology and algebra. For example, in programming language semantics papers one often encounters posets that have sups of ascending sequences, rather than directed sets, and a least element, because all the authors are interested in is the existence of (least) fixed point of continuous endo-functions, and these assumptions are enough for this purpose. Such posets are often called domains in such papers. But for applications of domain theory to topology, directed completeness is what one needs in general, and often we have more (even all sups — for example, a topological space is exponentiable if its lattice of open sets is a continuous dcpo — but this dcpo has all sups and moreover is a distributive lattice, and the continuous distributive lattices are precisely the topologies of exponentiable spaces, up to isomorphism). Because these applications and communities are so diverse, it is natural to see a divergence of terminology, even if many of the techniques are the same.

    diff, v13, current

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorDmitri Pavlov
    • CommentTimeMar 26th 2021

    Also, the other comment by Martín Escardó should be incorporated in the article, but I leave this to somebody more knowledgeable.

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthormaxsnew
    • CommentTimeAug 9th 2022

    Fix many broken links

    diff, v15, current

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeDec 29th 2022

    adjusted wording in the lead-in paragraph (here) and expanded to include pointers to the original references, which I have added

    diff, v18, current

    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeDec 29th 2022
    • (edited Dec 29th 2022)

    Question: Isn’t it striking that

    • domain theory is about regarding types as (0,1)(0,1)-categories;

    • homotopy type theory is about regarding types as (,0)(\infty,0)-categories


    Does anyone expand on this parallelism?

    • CommentRowNumber7.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeDec 29th 2022

    Incorporated Martin Escado’s old comment here by further expanding the lead-in paragraph (here) and adding this reference:

    diff, v18, current

    • CommentRowNumber8.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeDec 29th 2022

    polished up this reference item:

    diff, v18, current

    • CommentRowNumber9.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeMar 5th 2023

    fixed author name Tennet -> Tennent

    diff, v20, current

    • CommentRowNumber10.
    • CommentAuthorUlrik
    • CommentTimeMar 5th 2023

    fix markup typo in the link to Plotkin’s Pisa notes.

    diff, v21, current

    • CommentRowNumber11.
    • CommentAuthorSam Staton
    • CommentTimeMay 3rd 2023

    Record some proposals for categorical notions of domain.

    diff, v22, current

    • CommentRowNumber12.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeMay 4th 2023
    • (edited May 4th 2023)

    touched hyperlinking and wording (here)

    (We should hyperlink “intensionality” so that we know what is meant. We do have intensional type theory but I suppose this does not help in the present case.)

    added publication data for this item:

    diff, v24, current