Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.math > #639447

The Bitrot called Math Stack Exchange (Re: The Original Ganster (OG) of Gameification: IEEE 1044.1-1995)

Show all headers | View raw

Hi,

But who would have thought that Gameification leads to
Bitrot? I mean I asked the question when I had user4414,
until somebody mobbed me on MSE.

Now there is a nonsense answer accepted, and I will
not correct it. Since I don't use Bitrot anymore:

https://math.stackexchange.com/a/210730

The question "What is a natural one that is closest
to the lexical order?" of course wants "Conservativity".
Because by "lexical order" we mean (@<)/2 from Prolog.

But Mercio’s Algorithm doesn't satisfy Mats Carlsons appeal,
so we find a counter example to "Conservativity", which
is quite interesting:

problem(X, Y) :-
    repeat, fuzzy(X), acyclic_term(X),
    fuzzy(Y), acyclic_term(Y),
    mercio(<, X, Y), \+ X @< Y.

?- problem(X, Y).
X = s(s(1, 1), 1),
Y = s(s(1, _), s(_, 1))

It is interesting, since it is now an a) an acyclic term,
and that b) violates Mats Carlsons appeal:

?- X = s(s(1, 1), 1), Y = s(s(1, _), s(_, 1)), mercio(C, X, Y).
X = s(s(1, 1), 1),
Y = s(s(1, _), s(_, 1)),
C = (<).

?- X1 = s(1,1), Y1 = s(1,_), mercio(C, X1, Y1).
X1 = s(1, 1),
Y1 = s(1, _),
C = (>).

This is kind of an independence proof of total
order and Mats Carlsons appeal.

Cool!

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:
> Hi,
> 
> Nope, stack overflow didn't invent Gameification.
> This was already quite fun:
> 
> IEEE Guide to Classificaton of Software Anomalies
> https://github.com/Orthant/IEEE/blob/master/1044.1-1995.pdf
> 
> Here some examples:
> 
> - Boing Airplane lost in the Maledives:
>    No problem, severity 7
> 
> - Salary Payed twice by Booking Software:
>    No problem, severity 0
> 
> LoL
> 
> Bye
> 
> Mild Shock schrieb:
>> Mercio’s Algorithm (2012) for Rational
>> Tree Compare is specified here mathematically.
>> It is based on computing truncations A' = (A_0,
>> A_1, etc..) of a rational tree A:
>>
>> A < B ⟺ A′ <_lex B′
>>
>> https://math.stackexchange.com/a/210730
>>
>> Here is an implementation in Prolog.
>> First the truncation:
>>
>> trunc(_, T, T) :- var(T), !.
>> trunc(0, T, F) :- !, functor(T, F, _).
>> trunc(N, T, S) :-
>>     M is N-1,
>>     T =.. [F|L],
>>     maplist(trunc(M), L, R),
>>     S =.. [F|R].
>>
>> And then the iterative deepening:
>>
>> mercio(N, X, Y, C) :-
>>     trunc(N, X, A),
>>     trunc(N, Y, B),
>>     compare(D, A, B),
>>     D \== (=), !, C = D.
>> mercio(N, X, Y, C) :-
>>     M is N + 1,
>>     mercio(M, X, Y, C).
>>
>> The main entry first uses (==)/2 for a
>> terminating equality check and if the
>> rational trees are not equal, falls back
>> to the iterative deepening:
>>
>> mercio(C, X, Y) :- X == Y, !, C = (=).
>> mercio(C, X, Y) :- mercio(0, X, Y, C).
>>
>> I couldn’t find yet a triple that violates
>> transitivity. But I am also not much happy
>> with the code. Looks a little bit expensive
>> to create a truncation copy iteratively.
>>
>> Provided there is really no counter example,
>> maybe we can do mit more smart and faster? It
>> might also stand the test of conservativity?
> 

Back to sci.math | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Mercio’s Algorithm for Rational Tree Compare in Prolog Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-08-04 02:54 +0200
  The Original Ganster (OG) of Gameification: IEEE 1044.1-1995 (Re: Mercio’s Algorithm for Rational Tree Compare in Prolog) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-08-04 13:50 +0200
    The Bitrot called Math Stack Exchange (Re: The Original Ganster (OG) of Gameification: IEEE 1044.1-1995) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-08-04 13:57 +0200
      I guess its back to Hopcroft and Karp (Re: The Bitrot called Math Stack Exchange) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-08-04 14:12 +0200
  Szpilrajn Theorem and Suzumura Consistency (Re: Mercio’s Algorithm for Rational Tree Compare in Prolog Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-08-06 01:53 +0200
    The good thing is we have at least Mercio’s Algorithm (Re: Szpilrajn Theorem and Suzumura Consistency) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-08-06 08:09 +0200
      Hopcroft and Karp’s is just Contraction (Re: The good thing is we have at least Mercio’s Algorithm) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-08-06 08:16 +0200
        Re: Hopcroft and Karp’s is just Contraction (Re: The good thing is we have at least Mercio’s Algorithm) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-08-06 08:23 +0200
  Mercios decidability was already attested in 2012 (Re: Mercio’s Algorithm for Rational Tree Compare in Prolog) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-08-14 20:40 +0200
    Performance of Mercio’s Total Order (Re: Mercios decidability was already attested in 2012) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-08-15 23:51 +0200
      Fuzzy Testing is your Swiss Knife (Was: Performance of Mercio’s Total Order) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-08-15 23:54 +0200
        Yeah, we have another name! (Re: Fuzzy Testing is your Swiss Knife) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-08-16 12:40 +0200
          Monte Carlo sampling the frontier version (Re: Yeah, we have another name!) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-08-16 12:44 +0200
  An NPU could give 1000x more LIPS (Re: Mercio’s Algorithm for Rational Tree Compare in Prolog) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-11-27 14:23 +0100
    Zeus: A Language for Expressing Algorithms in Hardware (Re: Neural Network based dif/2 respectively (#\=)/2) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-11-27 15:02 +0100
    100% serious Giga Logical Inferences per Second (GLIPS) (Re: An NPU could give 1000x more LIPS (Re: Mercio’s Algorithm for Rational Tree Compare in Prolog) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-11-28 14:53 +0100

csiph-web