Is Mostowski Collapse a professional mathematician (Was: Is Mild Shock going rogue?)

From	Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.prolog
Subject	Is Mostowski Collapse a professional mathematician (Was: Is Mild Shock going rogue?)
Date	2025-07-25 14:16 +0200
Message-ID	<105vsir$2r22m$1@solani.org> (permalink)
References	<105vr4s$2r116$1@solani.org> <105vs19$2r1je$1@solani.org>

Show all headers | View raw

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 repesitory,
> 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
>>
>

Thread

Novacore goes Bisimulation: Scryer Prolog is Slow! Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-07-25 13:51 +0200
  Is Mild Shock going rogue? (Was: Novacore goes Bisimulation: Scryer Prolog is Slow!) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-07-25 14:07 +0200
    Is Mostowski Collapse a professional mathematician (Was: Is Mild Shock going rogue?) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-07-25 14:16 +0200
      New Project Name: NovaCore becomes VibeCore (Re: Is Mostowski Collapse a professional mathematician) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-07-25 14:42 +0200
  Nice Printing Error Scryer Prolog (Was: Novacore goes Bisimulation: Scryer Prolog is Slow!) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-07-26 21:33 +0200
    Dynamic unify_with_occurs_check/2 speed-up (Was: Nice Printing Error Scryer Prolog) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-07-26 21:37 +0200
  The End of Deutsch-Schorr-Waite [cycle_detection.rs] (Was: Novacore goes Bisimulation: Scryer Prolog is Slow!) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-07-28 10:50 +0200
    Backtracking Branching Association List (Re: The End of Deutsch-Schorr-Waite [cycle_detection.rs]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-07-28 11:02 +0200
      Do it like in acyclic_decompose/3 (Re: Backtracking Branching Association List) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-07-28 11:38 +0200
        Cache-Trashing vs Cache-Friendly [Code Example] (Re: Do it like in acyclic_decompose/3) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-07-28 17:27 +0200
    Entering the Age of Rational Trees (2025) (Was: The End of Deutsch-Schorr-Waite [cycle_detection.rs]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-08-16 13:02 +0200
    The End of Debray Allocator (Was: The End of Deutsch-Schorr-Waite [cycle_detection.rs]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-08-24 14:44 +0200
  The pairs are nasty, otherwise not always slow! (Re: Novacore goes Bisimulation: Scryer Prolog is Slow!) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-07-30 14:45 +0200
    It was painful for my GC, but fixed now (Re: The pairs are nasty, otherwise not always slow!) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-07-30 14:51 +0200
  Scryer Prolog has the most useless max_depth (Re: Novacore goes Bisimulation: Scryer Prolog is Slow!) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-08-02 13:43 +0200
    Novacore goes native (=)/2 and (==)/2 bisimulation (Was: Scryer Prolog has the most useless max_depth) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-08-02 14:45 +0200

csiph-web