Write for the reflexive closure of the transitive closure of a relation , and for its generated equivalence relation. The diamond property requires every pair to admit a one-step join . The Church-Rosser property requires a possibly longer join whenever . Equivalently, every pair of finite reductions with the same source has a common finite reduct. Identity steps may be included in the diamond convention without affecting the counterexample below.
Let and consider the lambda term . Contracting its outer beta-redex gives , whereas contracting the inner beta-redex gives . The only one-step reducts of are and ; the other branch has the sole one-step reduct . These terms are different even under alpha equivalence. Thus one-step beta reduction has no diamond property. Both branches do reach by finite beta reduction.
For the positive result, use parallel beta reduction , with rulesStructural induction, renaming binders to avoid capture, proves the substitution lemma: and imply . Define the complete development of a lambda term byand when the application is not initially a root beta-redex. Induction on a parallel derivation, using the substitution lemma in the contracting case, provesConsequently any two parallel reducts have the common successor . The ordinary one-step relation is included in the parallel relation, and every parallel step expands into finitely many ordinary steps; their finite closures therefore coincide. A finite grid of parallel diamonds joins any two finite parallel reductions. Finally a finite zigzag of forward and backward reductions can be joined inductively using that confluence. Hence beta reduction has the Church-Rosser property, although its individual steps do not have the diamond property.
Articles by others on the same topic
There are currently no matching articles.