Re: Relation subset operators
- From: cimode@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 7 Jun 2009 04:11:29 -0700 (PDT)
On 7 juin, 01:09, Marshall <marshall.spi...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jun 6, 2:19 pm, vadim...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:Marshall,
I'm still not sure if there are shorter versions. Marshall (who is
apparently in stealth mode) used to work on a program that generates
all valid RL expressions, and this looks like a problem fitted for
such a tool. The other curiosity is how many different RL expressions
one can generate with inversions and complements alone. For example,
the identities
Yes, these are both things my program can handle. The theoretical
aspects are fairly far along; what is killing me is the practical
aspects.
Namely, the number of possible expressions in even mildly complex
algebras is mega gigantic, and in algebras with operators that
are both commutative and associative, simply noting that two
complex terms of the same size are syntactically equivalent
is excruciatingly slow. I have recently purchased a much
more powerful machine but I'm not sure how much this will
help; the big wins have all been the results of greater
understanding of the nature of Universal Algebra.
For what it's worth...
For having been involved in the exercice of attempting to build a
logical machine to be a sound evaluator for relational operations, I
have discovered that there is an intricate relationship between the
coherence of relation equation solving and the logical computing model
used to actually represent a single relation, given current
constraints imposed by memory/cpu architectures. In other words, the
two aspects simply can hardly be dissociated: building an relation
equation expressor without considering a serious work onto how there
are to be represented logically (and physically as a consequence) will
not only put such effort in jeopardy but will make one hit a stone
dead end due to the fact that a logical expression solvers built on
the principle of direct image systems relation representation, has a
very limited scope of verification.
I have designed a logical and computing model based on the principle
of representing relations thanks to fractal contructs which allows to
exploit other effective mathematical tools than traditional ra to
effectively operate relations and have the logical machine make
logical inferences as to the most appropriate formulation of a
relational operation. I am not sure that does make sense to somebody
who's involved deeply into the logical aspect of correctness but it is
a friendly word of warning.
I still have good ideas left for how to do better, and IYes it is but not without having a complete view of the problem and
believe a complete equational theory of Vadim's algebra
is mechanically achievable.
taking into considerations the need for a sound logical representation
of relations.
Marshall
.
- References:
- Relation subset operators
- From: Cimode
- Re: Relation subset operators
- From: cimode
- Re: Relation subset operators
- From: paul c
- Re: Relation subset operators
- From: cimode
- Re: Relation subset operators
- From: paul c
- Re: Relation subset operators
- From: cimode
- Re: Relation subset operators
- From: paul c
- Re: Relation subset operators
- From: paul c
- Re: Relation subset operators
- From: cimode
- Re: Relation subset operators
- From: Walter Mitty
- Re: Relation subset operators
- From: paul c
- Re: Relation subset operators
- From: cimode
- Re: Relation subset operators
- From: paul c
- Re: Relation subset operators
- From: cimode
- Re: Relation subset operators
- From: vadimtro
- Re: Relation subset operators
- From: Marshall
- Relation subset operators
- Prev by Date: Re: Relation subset operators
- Next by Date: Re: Relation subset operators
- Previous by thread: Re: Relation subset operators
- Next by thread: Re: Relation subset operators
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|