Researcher profile

Dominic J. D. Hughes

Dominic J. D. Hughes contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 15 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
3works
0followers
4topics
1close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

3 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Tight limits and completions from Dedekind-MacNeille to Lambek-Isbell

While any infimum in a poset can also be computed as a supremum, and vice versa, categorical limits and colimits do not always approximate each other. If I approach a point from below, and you approach it from above, then we will surely meet if we live in a poset, but we may miss each other in a category. Can we characterize the limits and the colimits that approximate each other, and guarantee that we will meet? Such limits and colimits are called *tight*. Some critically important network applications depend on them. This paper characterizes tight limits and colimits, and describes tight completions, derived by applying the nucleus construction to adjunctions between loose completions. Just as the Dedekind-MacNeille completion of a poset preserves any existing infima and suprema, the tight completion of a category preserves any existing tight limits and colimits and is therefore idempotent.

preprint2008arXiv

Abstract p-time proof nets for MALL: Conflict nets

This paper presents proof nets for multiplicative-additive linear logic (MALL), called conflict nets. They are efficient, since both correctness and translation from a proof are p-time (polynomial time), and abstract, since they are invariant under transposing adjacent &-rules. A conflict net on a sequent is concise: axiom links with a conflict relation. Conflict nets are a variant of (and were inspired by) combinatorial proofs introduced recently for classical logic: each can be viewed as a maximal map (homomorphism) of contractible coherence spaces (P_4-free graphs, or cographs), from axioms to sequent. The paper presents new results for other proof nets: (1) correctness and cut elimination for slice nets (Hughes / van Glabbeek 2003) are p-time, and (2) the cut elimination proposed for monomial nets (Girard 1996) does not work. The subtleties which break monomial net cut elimination also apply to conflict nets: as with monomial nets, existence of a confluent cut elimination remains an open question.