Hi,
On the occassion of bisimulation introduction
in library(math), I have to also make another
announcement. There is a new Project name:
- Sadly novacore.ch was taken, and
we had to go with novacuor.ch
- Switzerland has already to many Novas,
Novartis, Nova-that, Nova-this, etc..
- Prolog and the core is not really new.
Even bisimulation is not really new.
- So lets try something new VibeCore,
admitedly inspired by Vibe Coding...
- Lets see how we can put live into the
name "vibe". Currently I find:
"Karpathy described it as "fully giving
in to the vibes, embracing exponentials,
and forgetting that the code even exists."
Ha Ha, compare_with_stack, has an similar
vibe, doesn't work for the pairs, one
has to go with compare_with_memo.
VibeCore hints to a future with more
computing power and a different view on
explorative problem solving.
Bye
Mild Shock schrieb:
Hi,
Is Mild Shock aka Mostowski Collapse a
professional mathematician. Well you can
figure out by yourself, just take this
piece by Peter Aczel:
NON-WELL-FOUNDED SETS
Peter Aczel - 24 December 1981 https://les-mathematiques.net/vanilla/uploads/editor/fh/v4pi6qyxfbel.pdf
Open the PDF, look at page 4:
Mostowski's Collapsing Lemma:
Every well-founded graph has a unique decoration.
While I had the nick name, you can still see
it in the comments section here: https://stackoverflow.com/q/65600226/17524790
I heard a lot of funny interpretations of the nickname:
- Is it derived from Wave Function Collapse?
- Is it derived from Bridge
- Etc..
Not a single person I met knew something
about good old set theory.
So much to anybody thinking he is superior:
I PISS AND SHIT ON YOU
Bye
Mild Shock schrieb:
Hi,
Is Mild Shock going rogue? Not really,
I am only amused that a couple of academic
frauds like these here:
- Bart Demoen
- Ulrich Neumerkel
- Paulo Moura
- Joseph Vidal-Rosset
Think they can oppress what they view a
non-academic. Its more explicit in what
Bart Demoen wrote back then, but more
implicit how the above morons act. For
example blocking me from all repositories,
making it impossible for me to raise issues,
and strangly discussion by dogmatic nonsense,
doesn't increase the willingness of the
harassed person to share something:
What occurs-check optimizations is SWI Prolog using?
https://stackoverflow.com/a/65620337/17524790
Also that gists would be found on
archive.org is nonsense.
Bye
Mild Shock schrieb:
Hi,
Having fun with Bisimulation, and a new test
suite of nasty circular pairs. But how store
circular pairs, if clauses do not support
circular terms. Well chop it up into equations,
I create 1000 such equation pairs:
test([A = c(A, B), C = c(A, D), E = n, _ = c(F, B),
F = c(C, C), G = c(G, D), D = c(E, C), B = n],
[H = c(H, I), J = c(K, I), L = c(L, I), I = c(M, N),
O = c(K, J), N = n, K = c(K, J), M = c(K, O)]).
Etc..
The pairs are nasty because the usual compare_with_stack/2
chokes on them. Here some results:
/* SWI-Prolog 9.3.26 */
?- time((between(1,30,_), part, fail; true)).
% 540,118 inferences, 0.047 CPU in 0.041 seconds (115% CPU, 11522517
Lips)
true.
/* Trealla Prolog 2.78.40 */
?- time((between(1,30,_), part, fail; true)).
% Time elapsed 0.113s, 1143903 Inferences, 10.157 MLips
true.
/* Scryer Prolog 0.9.4-417 */
?- time((between(1,30,_), part, fail; true)).
% CPU time: 0.226s, 1_117_809 inferences
true.
/* Dogelog Player 1.3.5 */
?- time((between(1,30,_), part2, fail; true)).
% Zeit 309 ms, GC 0 ms, Lips 8693718, Uhr 25.07.2025 13:47
true.
The amazing thing is, I compared a 100% Prolog
implementation, so there is a lot of head room
for improvement:
part2 :-
bitest(X,Y), X ~~ Y, fail; true.
The operator (~~)/2 is part of library(math),
and has been implemented with same_term/2 so far.
Bye
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)