chorasimilarity

I think that the discussions about the map-territory relation are shallow.

This is a public call for funding a RAAR group.

They write: “If we could learn to read and write in the code of life it would make biology programmable.

I use dilations notiations.

Two items which are compatible with previous discussions here: Let’s take it one by one.

Two possibilities: Which way do you think is true?

If you see this then share with attribution.

This quote is from section 2.1 of the UPIM report 10.

Thank you for noticing me about arXiv:2008.08814 An RNA-Based Theory of Natural Universal Computation.

I was notified about this project from the 2000’s Universally Programmable Intelligent Matter by Bruce J.

Consider any graph with trivalent nodes from the eight ones of the permutation cube (A, L, D, FOX, FI, FOE, S, N), as well as 1-valent nodes like I, K, T, and with free half edges which will receive 1 valent FRIN or FROUT nodes.

I just noticed that my post Problems with the ANR Bigben project contained a weird first paragraph, which I have not written: The insertion code was: “wp:paragraph {“placeholder”:”What are your feelings about eating meat?”}”

More asymmetric, better it computes with only local rules: Mazza IC ~ Lafont IC < dirIC < chemlambda < Schonfinkel SKI < chemski … with all sorts of variations or rediscoveries.

The North combinator N is the partner of the South combinator S.

Here is my prediction for 2024 in AI, written here to compare in a year.

Previous post: Why the S combinator is curvature.

As Large Language Models are both random and asemantic, it seems that asemantic computing wins the world.

My local lambdalife is the most advanced version now.

So now I found and fixed two bugs.

UPDATE: see the nulkukel and the SKIworm at the updated chemSKI with tokens page.

Mentioned before that in my opinion the most interesting thing in Lafont’ Interaction Combinators is his universality at the graph rewrite level.

Artificial chemistries may also be in vivo, or in vitro: While in vitro chemistries are very much the fashion, the in vivo chemistries are very intriguing!

Again I used phind.com to summarize a github article: Zipper logic revisited https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.14769666.v1 Then phind suggested the question from the title and answered it.

Suppose any graph rewrite (like in chemlambda, or dirIC, chemSKI, etc) is a command, where “x” is the name, or the kind, type of rewrite: rewrite -x graph > graph Then stdin is graph before rewrite stdout is graph after rewrite stderr is true if a rewrite…

My paper: Argument from AI summary: How does asemantic computing differ from traditional distributed computing?.

And with that I close this chain of controversies, which I don’t need actually.

In the last post Anthropic’ “sycophancy in language model” submitted to arXiv the same day as my “argument from AI summary” and… there was reported an unlikely double time coincidence concerning the behaviour of unknown CS arXiv moderators, when faced with

Their article is arXiv:2310.13548 and my article, see version submitted here, was rejected over the weekend with no argument.

phind.com bug: summarize arXiv:… I tried “summarize arXiv:1103.6007” with phind [0], archived answer [1] and I discovered I’m the proud author of the latest most important AI paper: Attention is all you need.

In the Argument from AI summary was proposed a new use of an AI tool, as a virtual check for clarity of a thesis communicated by the author of it, in a rational discussion.

UPDATE: submitted this as an article to arXiv.

I am very glad that the Romanian Academy is a member of CoARA.

I tried the same initial question, described here, ie “summarize arXiv:1103.6007”, this time with ChatGPT Online.

Socrates discusses with Wittgenstein.

After experiences with phind.com summarize arXiv:… (last post here), I tried to see if phind can summarize (and has access to) github md writings.

Continues after the first part and after the Sci-Hub AI post.

Wouldn’t that be nice?

UPDATE 27.09.2023: Is it possible that arxiv.org does not allow the access to the articles by phind.com algorithm?

Due to rare events, the rotten fabric of the society broke in 2020.

Read Summer numerics: permutation cube, first.

Thanks to Boris Kolev skills, here is an announcement of a talk: Mardi 24 Mai 2005 (LATP, Université de Provence, Marseille) 14h Marius Buliga (Ecole Pol. féd. de Lausanne) Flots hamiltoniens d’isometries On montre que tout flot hamiltonien dans une varié…

To me it looks like this, see page 6 of this pdf.

Very clear, only one paragraph leads to a resource which was abandoned early, thus not useful (therefore I eliminated this paragraph).

I deposited at figshare this book (local copy), prepared in 2011, which is a very useful entry point in the subject of analysis in metric spaces based on dilation structures. https://figshare.com/articles/book/Metric_spaces_with_dilations/24113505

I found this by playing with phind.com.

In chemSKI with tokens: world building and economy in the SKI universe or arXiv:2306.00938 we describe two synthesis rewrites, which are not yet implemented in the chemSKI programs.

Some time ago I made a parallel between academic mathematics (and science) and the revolution against academic painting, aka the impressionists.

I asked phind.com “artificial chemistry and lambda calculus”.

In zipper logic I define zipper combinators as in the image (which appears last time in Thank you hundredrabbits :)) I can define those because there is a correspondence between (knot diagrams) crossings and application and abstraction from lambda calculus

This is an excerpt from Molecular computers which are based on graph rewriting systems like chemlambda, chemSKI or Interaction Combinators (v1.0.0).