« Discussion:Lambda counting » : différence entre les versions

De Wiki du LAMA (UMR 5127)
Aller à la navigation Aller à la recherche
Aucun résumé des modifications
 
(15 versions intermédiaires par 3 utilisateurs non affichées)
Ligne 1 : Ligne 1 :
==Current semaphore==
==Semaphore==


Attribution of the work currently being done (this is a semaphore !)
Attribution of the work currently being done (this is a semaphore !)


Rene:
Rene:
* introduction
* section about lambda calculus to fix notation


Christophe:
Christophe:
Ligne 11 : Ligne 11 :
Kasia:
Kasia:
* the result about closed-term (and much more)
* the result about closed-term (and much more)

Marek:

Jakub:

Guillaume:
NOTHING because I don't remember the proof of 'each starting lambda binds many variables'

==Reservation of future semaphore==

Rene:

Christophe:

Kasia:
* generating function
* generating function


Ligne 18 : Ligne 33 :


Guillaume:
Guillaume:

== About the lower bound ==

The lower bound can probably be improved by replacing Catalan with the sum of Mtzkin M(n,k) for
k between 0 and n/ln(n). This probably would give the same exponential factor for the lower and upper bound and get us nearer to an equivalent. Is it worth it ?

Dernière version du 2 décembre 2008 à 21:04

Current semaphore

Attribution of the work currently being done (this is a semaphore !)

Rene:

  • introduction

Christophe:

  • the lower and upper bound for size 0 variables

Kasia:

  • the result about closed-term (and much more)

Marek:

Jakub:

Guillaume: NOTHING because I don't remember the proof of 'each starting lambda binds many variables'

Reservation of future semaphore

Rene:

Christophe:

Kasia:

  • generating function

Marek:

Jakub:

Guillaume:

About the lower bound

The lower bound can probably be improved by replacing Catalan with the sum of Mtzkin M(n,k) for k between 0 and n/ln(n). This probably would give the same exponential factor for the lower and upper bound and get us nearer to an equivalent. Is it worth it ?