Why people talk about SKI calculus when S and K combinators can be used to create any other combinator including I?
2026-03-25 22:07:24.1774476444
Why SKI when SK is complete
170 Views Asked by Bumbble Comm https://math.techqa.club/user/bumbble-comm/detail At
1
There are 1 best solutions below
Related Questions in LOGIC
- Theorems in MK would imply theorems in ZFC
- What is (mathematically) minimal computer architecture to run any software
- What formula proved in MK or Godel Incompleteness theorem
- Determine the truth value and validity of the propositions given
- Is this a commonly known paradox?
- Help with Propositional Logic Proof
- Symbol for assignment of a truth-value?
- Find the truth value of... empty set?
- Do I need the axiom of choice to prove this statement?
- Prove that any truth function $f$ can be represented by a formula $φ$ in cnf by negating a formula in dnf
Related Questions in COMPUTABILITY
- Are all infinite sets of indices of computable functions extensional?
- Simple applications of forcing in recursion theory?
- Proof of "Extension" for Rice's Theorem
- How to interpret Matiyasevich–Robinson–Davis–Putnam in term of algebraic geometry or geometry?
- Does there exist a weakly increasing cofinal function $\kappa \to \kappa$ strictly below the diagonal?
- Why isn't the idea of "an oracle for the halting problem" considered self-contradictory?
- is there any set membership of which is not decidable in polynomial time but semidecidable in P?
- The elementary theory of finite commutative rings
- Is there any universal algorithm converting grammar to Turing Machine?
- Is the sign of a real number decidable?
Related Questions in COMBINATORY-LOGIC
- Relation between Lambda calculus and SKI combinator calculus
- How to define halting status in combinatory logic
- Could we define an arity of a term in combinatory logic and consider some inference rule?
- Hindley and Seldin "Introduction to Combinators and Lambda calculus": Question about the solution to exercise 3.5.
- number of surjective functions from X to Y where card(Y)=k < n =card(X)
- Relationship between the semantics of simply typed lambda calculus and combinatory logic
- An equation involving multisets
- Chaitin's constant for lambda calculus and combinatory logic
- Is there a proof of (non)existence of a proper universal combinator?
- Proof completion: if $Y$ is a closed term in strong nf, then $Yx$ weakly reduces to a strong nf $Z$
Trending Questions
- Induction on the number of equations
- How to convince a math teacher of this simple and obvious fact?
- Find $E[XY|Y+Z=1 ]$
- Refuting the Anti-Cantor Cranks
- What are imaginary numbers?
- Determine the adjoint of $\tilde Q(x)$ for $\tilde Q(x)u:=(Qu)(x)$ where $Q:U→L^2(Ω,ℝ^d$ is a Hilbert-Schmidt operator and $U$ is a Hilbert space
- Why does this innovative method of subtraction from a third grader always work?
- How do we know that the number $1$ is not equal to the number $-1$?
- What are the Implications of having VΩ as a model for a theory?
- Defining a Galois Field based on primitive element versus polynomial?
- Can't find the relationship between two columns of numbers. Please Help
- Is computer science a branch of mathematics?
- Is there a bijection of $\mathbb{R}^n$ with itself such that the forward map is connected but the inverse is not?
- Identification of a quadrilateral as a trapezoid, rectangle, or square
- Generator of inertia group in function field extension
Popular # Hahtags
second-order-logic
numerical-methods
puzzle
logic
probability
number-theory
winding-number
real-analysis
integration
calculus
complex-analysis
sequences-and-series
proof-writing
set-theory
functions
homotopy-theory
elementary-number-theory
ordinary-differential-equations
circles
derivatives
game-theory
definite-integrals
elementary-set-theory
limits
multivariable-calculus
geometry
algebraic-number-theory
proof-verification
partial-derivative
algebra-precalculus
Popular Questions
- What is the integral of 1/x?
- How many squares actually ARE in this picture? Is this a trick question with no right answer?
- Is a matrix multiplied with its transpose something special?
- What is the difference between independent and mutually exclusive events?
- Visually stunning math concepts which are easy to explain
- taylor series of $\ln(1+x)$?
- How to tell if a set of vectors spans a space?
- Calculus question taking derivative to find horizontal tangent line
- How to determine if a function is one-to-one?
- Determine if vectors are linearly independent
- What does it mean to have a determinant equal to zero?
- Is this Batman equation for real?
- How to find perpendicular vector to another vector?
- How to find mean and median from histogram
- How many sides does a circle have?
As was mentioned in comments, S, K and I correspond exactly to what is needed to prove abstraction elimination, in the nice tidy sense that each case syntactical case in the induction step has exactly one combinator that handles that case alone.
Apart from that, however, one can also argue that I is more fundamental than the two other operators. It would be a very strange logic that didn't prove $A\to A$, but logics that reject S or K do exist. Linear logic, for example, rejects both; S because it corresponds to duplication of resources and K because it throws resources away.
So when describing a set of combinators, it is easier and more convenient to say, "yes of course we have I" than to let the reader spend energy on figuring out how I can be made from other available combinators.