Personal tools

Chaitin's construction

From HaskellWiki

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
m (No indenting for bash code)
m (Spell-check with ispell)
Line 16: Line 16:
 
:<math>\widehat{\mathbf K} \equiv 01</math>
 
:<math>\widehat{\mathbf K} \equiv 01</math>
 
:<math>\widehat{\left(x y\right)} \equiv 1 \widehat x \widehat y</math>
 
:<math>\widehat{\left(x y\right)} \equiv 1 \widehat x \widehat y</math>
of course, <math>c</math>, <math>d</math> are metavariables, and also some other notations are changed slightly.
+
of course, <math>c</math>, <math>d</math> are meta-variables, and also some other notations are changed slightly.
   
 
Now, Chaitin's construction will be here
 
Now, Chaitin's construction will be here
Line 29: Line 29:
 
;<math>\mathrm{Dom}_\mathrm{dc}</math>
 
;<math>\mathrm{Dom}_\mathrm{dc}</math>
 
:should denote the set of syntactically correct bit sequences (semantically, they may either terminate or diverge), i.e. the domain of the decoding function, i.e. the range of the coding function. Thus, <math>\left\{00, 01, 1\;00\;00, 1\;00\;01, 1\;01\;00, 1\;01\;01, \dots\right\} = \mathrm{Dom}_{\mathrm{dc}} = \mathrm{Rng}_{\widehat\ }</math>
 
:should denote the set of syntactically correct bit sequences (semantically, they may either terminate or diverge), i.e. the domain of the decoding function, i.e. the range of the coding function. Thus, <math>\left\{00, 01, 1\;00\;00, 1\;00\;01, 1\;01\;00, 1\;01\;01, \dots\right\} = \mathrm{Dom}_{\mathrm{dc}} = \mathrm{Rng}_{\widehat\ }</math>
;“Absolut value”
+
;“Absolute value”
 
:should mean the length of a bit sequence (not [[combinatory logic]] term evaluation!)
 
:should mean the length of a bit sequence (not [[combinatory logic]] term evaluation!)
   
Line 51: Line 51:
 
== To do ==
 
== To do ==
   
Writing a program in Haskell -- or in [[combinatory logic]]:-) -- which could help in making conjectures on [[combinatory logic]]-based Chaitin's constructions. It would make only approximations, in a similar way that most Mandelbrot plotting softwares work: it would as for a maximum limit of iterations.
+
Writing a program in Haskell -- or in [[combinatory logic]]:-) -- which could help in making conjectures on [[combinatory logic]]-based Chaitin's constructions. It would make only approximations, in a similar way that most Mandelbrot plotting softwares work: it would ask for a maximum limit of iterations.
 
chaitin --computation=cl --coding=tromp --limit-of-iterations=5000 --digits=10 --decimal
 
chaitin --computation=cl --coding=tromp --limit-of-iterations=5000 --digits=10 --decimal

Revision as of 13:53, 3 August 2006

Contents


1 Introduction

Are there any real numbers which are defined exactly, but cannot be computed? This question leads us to exact real arithmetic, foundations of mathematics and computer science.

Wikipedia article on Chaitin's construction, referring to e.g.

2 Basing it on combinatory logic

Some more direct relatedness to functional programming: we can base Ω on combinatory logic (instead of a Turing machine), see the prefix coding system described in Binary Lambda Calculus and Combinatory Logic (page 20) written by John Tromp:

\widehat{\mathbf S} \equiv 00
\widehat{\mathbf K} \equiv 01
\widehat{\left(x y\right)} \equiv 1 \widehat x \widehat y

of course, c, d are meta-variables, and also some other notations are changed slightly.

Now, Chaitin's construction will be here

\sum_{p\in \mathrm{Dom}_\mathrm{dc},\;\mathrm{hnf}\left(\mathrm{dc}\;p\right)} 2^{-\left|p\right|}

where

hnf
should denote an unary predicate “has normal form” (“terminates”)
dc
should mean an operator “decode” (a function from finite bit sequences to combinatory logic terms)
2\!\;^{*}
should denote the set of all finite bit sequences
Domdc
should denote the set of syntactically correct bit sequences (semantically, they may either terminate or diverge), i.e. the domain of the decoding function, i.e. the range of the coding function. Thus, \left\{00, 01, 1\;00\;00, 1\;00\;01, 1\;01\;00, 1\;01\;01, \dots\right\} = \mathrm{Dom}_{\mathrm{dc}} = \mathrm{Rng}_{\widehat\ }
“Absolute value”
should mean the length of a bit sequence (not combinatory logic term evaluation!)

Here, dc is a partial function (from finite bit sequences). If this is confusing or annoying, then we can choose a more Haskell-like approach, making dc a total function:

 dc :: [Bit] -> Maybe CL

then, Chaitin's construction will be

\sum_{p\in 2^*,\;\mathrm{maybe}\;\downarrow\;\mathrm{hnf}\;\left(\mathrm{dc}\;p\right)} 2^{-\left|p\right|}

where \downarrow should denote false truth value.

3 Related concepts

4 To do

Writing a program in Haskell -- or in combinatory logic:-) -- which could help in making conjectures on combinatory logic-based Chaitin's constructions. It would make only approximations, in a similar way that most Mandelbrot plotting softwares work: it would ask for a maximum limit of iterations.

chaitin --computation=cl --coding=tromp --limit-of-iterations=5000 --digits=10 --decimal