Liste des Groupes | Revenir à theory |
On 2024-05-14 14:21:10 +0000, olcott said:Yes that is better.
On 5/14/2024 4:44 AM, Mikko wrote:The term "wildcard" is usually not used in this context. And the wordOn 2024-05-12 15:58:02 +0000, olcott said:>
>On 5/12/2024 10:21 AM, Mikko wrote:>On 2024-05-12 11:34:17 +0000, Richard Damon said:>
>On 5/12/24 5:19 AM, Mikko wrote:>On 2024-05-11 16:26:30 +0000, olcott said:>
>I am working on providing an academic quality definition of this>
term.
The definition in Wikipedia is good enough.
>
I think he means, he is working on a definition that redefines the field to allow him to claim what he wants.
Here one can claim whatever one wants anysay.
In if one wants to present ones claims on some significant forum then
it is better to stick to usual definitions as much as possible.
>Sort of like his new definition of H as an "unconventional" machine that some how both returns an answer but also keeps on running.>
There are systems where that is possible but unsolvable problems are
unsolvable even in those systems.
>
When Ĥ is applied to ⟨Ĥ⟩
Ĥ.q0 ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* embedded_H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* Ĥ.qy ∞
Ĥ.q0 ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* embedded_H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* Ĥ.qn
This notation does not work with machines that can, or have parts
that can, return a value without (or before) termination.
>
⊢* specifies a wildcard set of state transitions that could
include a transition to a non-final state embedded_H.qn.
"set" is not sufficiently specific, so "sequence" should be used instead.
Anyway, the language cannot handle a situation where one part of aThe language of Turing machine descriptions certainly can handle
machine gives its result to another parts and then both continue their
execution.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.