## Abstract

This paper provides a concrete and simple introduction to two pillars of domain theory: (1) solving recursive domain equations, and (2) universal and saturated domains. Our exposition combines Larsen and Winskel’s idea on solving domain equations using information systems with Girard’s idea of stable domain theory in the form of coherence spaces, or graphs. Detailed constructions are given for universal and even homogeneous objects in two categories of graphs: one representing binary complete, prime algebraic domains with complete primes covering the bottom; the other representing*w*-algebraic, prime algebraic lattices. The back-and-forth argument in model theory helps to enlighten the constructions.

## Keywords

domain theory category theory graph theory universal objects recursive domain equations coherence spaces stable domains the back-and-forth argument## References

- [1]Scott D S. Domains for denotational semantics.
*Lecture Notes in Computer Science 140*, 1982, pp.577–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - [2]Girard Jean-Yves. Linear logic.
*Theoretical Computer Science*, 1987, 50: 1–102.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar - [3]Larsen K, Winskel G. Using information systems to solve recursive domain equations effectively.
*Lecture Notes in Computer Science 173*, 1984, pp.109–130.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar - [4]Droste M, Göbel R. Universal domains in the theory of denotational semantics of programming languages. In
*Proc. the IEEE 5th Annual Symposium on Logic in Computer Science*Philadelphia, 1990, pp.19–34.Google Scholar - [5]Barwise Jon. Back and forth through infinitary logic.
*Studies in Model Theory*, MAA Studies in Math., 1973, 8: 5–34.Google Scholar - [6]Winskel G. An introduction to event structures.
*Lecture Notes in Computer Science 354*, 1988, pp.364–399.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - [7]Berry G, Curien P-L. Sequential algorithms on concrete data structures.
*Theoretical Computer Science*, 1982 20: 265–321.zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - [8]Chen Y-X. Stone duality and representation of stable domain.
*International Journal of Computer and Mathematics with Application*, 1997, 34: 27–34.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar - [9]Zhang G-Q. DI-domains as prime information systems.
*Information and Computation*, 1992, 100(2): 151–177.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - [10]Zhang G-Q. Some monoidal closed categories of domains and event structures.
*Mathematical Structures in Computer Science*, 1993, 3: 259–276.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar - [11]Zhang G-Q. Logic of Domains. Birkhauser, Boston, 1991.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
- [12]Zhang G-Q. Universal quasi-prime algebraic domains. In
*Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on the Mathematical Foundations of Programming Semantics, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 802*, 1994, pp.454–473.Google Scholar - [13]Zhang G-Q. The largest Cartesian closed category of stable domain.
*Theoretical Computer Science*, 1996, 166: 203–219.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - [14]Bacsich P, Hughs D R. Syntactic characterisations of amalgamation, convexity and related properties.
*The Journal of Symbolic Logic*, 1974, 39(3): pp.433–451.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - [15]Asperti A, Longo G. Categories, Types and Structures. MIT Press, 1991.Google Scholar
- [16]Gunter C. Universal profinite domains.
*Information and Computation*, 1987, 72: 1–30.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - [17]Gunter C, Jung A. Coherence and consistency in domains.
*Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra.*, 1990, 63: 49–66.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - [18]Plotkin G.
*T*^{w}as a universal domain.*Journal of Computer and System Sciences*, 1978, 17: 209–236.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - [19]Scott D S. Data types as lattices.
*SIAM J. Computing*, 1976, 5: 522–587.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

## Copyright information

© Science Press, Beijing China and Allerton Press Inc. 2001