Talk:Nominal terms (computer science)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Nominal terms (computer science) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Computer science Unassessed

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computer science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Computer science related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Computer scienceWikipedia:WikiProject Computer scienceTemplate:WikiProject Computer scienceComputer science

???

This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Things you can help WikiProject Computer science with:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests :
- Requested articles/Applied arts and sciences/Computer science, computing, and Internet
Cleanup :
- Computer science articles needing attention
- Computer science articles needing expert attention
Copyedit :
- Computing
Expand :
- Computer science
Infobox :
- Computer science articles without infoboxes
Maintain :
- Timeline of computing 2020–present
Photo :
- Find pictures for the biographies of computer scientists (see List of computer scientists)
- Computing articles needing images
Stubs :
- Computer science stubs
Unreferenced :
- WikiProject Computer science/Unreferenced BLPs
Project-related :
- Tag all relevant articles in Category:Computer science and sub-categories with {{WikiProject Computer science}}

Topic

Shouldn't this article be about [1] nominal logic instead? We lack one for the more general topic, don't we? I take it nominal unification (the ref just added) is unification in nominal logic... Pcap ping 20:38, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, this logic appears to be only equational (p. 6 in Urban and Pitts). FYI, Wikipedia lack even an article on the 1930's vintage equational logic, never mind the recent (naming aware) developments. Pcap ping 20:46, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, nominal logic is a theory inside first-order logic which allows you to do "nominal style reasoning". Nominal terms are something altogether. The two are closely related though, as they both came out of the same research programme, and both have a history/foundation in nominal sets. An article on nominal logic should be added to Wikipedia, though.

When you say the logic appears to be equational, to what are you referring? Nominal terms *aren't* an equational logic, they're just a syntax. There are two equational logics that use the syntax though: nominal algebra, and nominal equational logic. What you are probably looking at are the derivable alpha-equivalence rules for nominal terms. Consequently, nominal unification is unification between nominal terms (the relevant unification algorithm for nominal logic is first-order unification).

We do have a Wiki article on a more general topic: Nominal techniques, though I have reduced this to a stub. I plan to add more about nominal sets there. DPMulligan (talk) 21:16, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]