Kleene fixed-point theorem

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Citation bot (talk | contribs) at 19:18, 12 August 2019 (Removed URL that duplicated unique identifier. Removed parameters. | You can use this bot yourself. Report bugs here.| Activated by User:Headbomb). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

In the mathematical areas of order and lattice theory, the Kleene fixed-point theorem, named after American mathematician Stephen Cole Kleene, states the following:

Kleene Fixed-Point Theorem. Suppose is a directed-complete partial order (dcpo) with a least element, and let be a Scott-continuous (and therefore monotone) function. Then has a least fixed point, which is the supremum of the ascending Kleene chain of

The ascending Kleene chain of f is the chain

obtained by iterating f on the least element ⊥ of L. Expressed in a formula, the theorem states that

where denotes the least fixed point.

This result is often attributed to Alfred Tarski, but Tarski's fixed point theorem does not consider how fixed points can be computed by iterating f from some seed (also, it pertains to monotone functions on complete lattices).

Proof[1]

We first have to show that the ascending Kleene chain of   exists in  . To show that, we prove the following:

Lemma. If   is a dcpo with a least element, and   is Scott-continuous, then  
Proof. We use induction:
  • Assume n = 0. Then   since   is the least element.
  • Assume n > 0. Then we have to show that  . By rearranging we get  . By inductive assumption, we know that   holds, and because f is monotone (property of Scott-continuous functions), the result holds as well.

As a corollary of the Lemma we have the following directed ω-chain:

 

From the definition of a dcpo it follows that   has a supremum, call it   What remains now is to show that   is the least fixed-point.

First, we show that   is a fixed point, i.e. that  . Because   is Scott-continuous,  , that is  . Also, since   and because   has no influence in determining the supremum we have:  . It follows that  , making   a fixed-point of  .

The proof that   is in fact the least fixed point can be done by showing that any element in   is smaller than any fixed-point of   (because by property of supremum, if all elements of a set   are smaller than an element of   then also   is smaller than that same element of  ). This is done by induction: Assume   is some fixed-point of  . We now prove by induction over   that  . The base of the induction   obviously holds:   since   is the least element of  . As the induction hypothesis, we may assume that  . We now do the induction step: From the induction hypothesis and the monotonicity of   (again, implied by the Scott-continuity of  ), we may conclude the following:   Now, by the assumption that   is a fixed-point of   we know that   and from that we get  

See also

References

  1. ^ Stoltenberg-Hansen, V.; Lindstrom, I.; Griffor, E. R. (1994). Mathematical Theory of Domains by V. Stoltenberg-Hansen. Cambridge University Press. p. 24. doi:10.1017/cbo9781139166386. ISBN 0521383447.