Hostname: page-component-6b989bf9dc-pmhlf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-15T04:11:43.887Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Inclusions for partiality

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 December 2014

HENDRIK HILBERDINK*
Affiliation:
2-28-32 Sasuke, Kamakura, Kanagawa 248-0017, Japan Email: hbh@dune.ocn.ne.jp

Abstract

In this paper we introduce stable systems of inclusions, which feature chosen arrows AB to capture the notion that A is a subobject of B, and proposes them as an alternative context to stable systems of monics to discuss partiality. A category C equipped with such a system $\mathscr{I}$, called an i-category, is shown to give rise to an associated category ∂(C,$\mathscr{I}$) of partial maps, which is a split restriction category whose restriction monics are inclusions. This association is the object part of a 2-equivalence between such inclusively split restriction categories and i-categories. $\mathscr{I}$ determines a stable system of monics $\mathscr{I}$+ on C, and, conversely, a stable system of monics $\mathscr{M}$ on C yields an i-category (C[$\mathscr{M}$],$\mathscr{M}$+), giving a 2-adjunction between i-categories and m-categories. The category of partial maps Par(C,$\mathscr{M}$) is isomorphic to the full subcategory of ∂(C[$\mathscr{M}$],$\mathscr{M}$+) comprising the objects of C, and ∂(C,$\mathscr{I}$) ≅ Par(C,$\mathscr{I}$+).

Type
Paper
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Căzănescu, V. E. and Roşu, G. (1997) Weak inclusions systems. Mathematical Structures in Computer Science 7 (2)195206.Google Scholar
Căzănescu, V. E. and Roşu, G. (2000) Weak inclusions systems; part 2. Journal of Universal Computer Science 6 (1)521.Google Scholar
Cockett, J. R. B. and Lack, S. (2002) Restriction categories I: categories of partial maps. Theoretical Computer Science 270 (1–2)223259.Google Scholar
Cockett, J. R. B. and Lack, S. (2003) Restriction categories II: partial map classification. Theoretical Computer Science 294 (1–2)61102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cockett, J. R. B. and Lack, S. (2007) Restriction categories III: colimits, partial limits and extensitivity. Mathematical Structures in Computer Science 17 (4)775817.Google Scholar
Cockett, J. R. B. and Manes, E. (2009) Boolean and classical restriction categories. Mathematical Structures in Computer Science 19 (2)357416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diaconescu, R. (2008) Institution-independent Model Theory 1st, Birkhäuser.Google Scholar
Diaconescu, R. and Futatsugi, K. (1998) CafeOBJ Report: The Language, Proof Techniques, and Methodologies for Object-Oriented Algebriac Specification, AMAST Series in Computing 6, World Scientific.Google Scholar
Diaconescu, R., Goguen, J. and Stefaneas, P. (1993) Logical Support for Modularisation. In: Huet, G. and Plotkin, G. (eds.) Logical Environments, Cambridge University Press 83130.Google Scholar
Goguen, J. and Burstall, R. (1984) Introducing Institutions. In: Clarke, E. and Kozen, D. (eds.) Proceedings, Logics of Programming Workshop. Springer-Verlag Lecture Notes in Computer Science 164 221256.Google Scholar
Di Paola, R. A. and Heller, A. (1987) Dominical Categories: Recursion Theory without Elements. Journal of Symbolic Logic 52 (3)594635.Google Scholar
Robinson, E. and Rosolini, G. (1988) Categories of partial maps. Information and Computation 79 (2)95130.Google Scholar
Rosolini, G. (1986) Continuity and effectiveness in topoi, D. Phil. Thesis, University of Oxford.Google Scholar