Re: Unpartial Halt Deciders

Liste des GroupesRevenir à theory 
Sujet : Re: Unpartial Halt Deciders
De : F.Zwarts (at) *nospam* HetNet.nl (Fred. Zwarts)
Groupes : comp.theory
Date : 19. Apr 2025, 09:18:53
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <vtvm9d$veeo$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
Op 19.apr.2025 om 05:52 schreef olcott:
On 4/18/2025 2:32 PM, Keith Thompson wrote:
Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> writes:
On Fri, 18 Apr 2025 12:25:36 -0700, Keith Thompson wrote:
Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> writes:
I, aka Mr Flibble, have created a new computer science term, the
"Unpartial Halt Decider".  It is a Halt Decider over the domain of all
program-input pairs excluding pathological input (a manifestation of
the self referencial category error).
[...]
>
Do you have a rigorous definition of "pathological input"?
>
Is there an algorithm to determine whether a given input is
"pathological" or not?
>
I could define an is_prime() function like this:
>
     bool is_prime(int n) {
         return n >= 3 && n % 2 == 1;
         // returns true for odd numbers >= 3, false for all others
     }
>
I'll just say that odd numbers that are not prime are pathological
input, so I don't have to deal with them.
>
Pathological input:
>
Self-referencial to the decider.
>
OK.
>
Do you have a *rigorous* definition of "pathological input"?
>
Is there an algorithm to determine whether a given input is
"pathological" or not?
>
 int DD()
{
   int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
   if (Halt_Status)
     HERE: goto HERE;
   return Halt_Status;
}
 Patterns isomorphic to the above when simulated by HHH.
 
Not an answer for the question: Is there an algorithm to determine whether a given input is "pathological" or not?

Date Sujet#  Auteur
18 Apr 25 * Re: Unpartial Halt Deciders25Keith Thompson
18 Apr 25 `* Re: Unpartial Halt Deciders24Keith Thompson
18 Apr 25  +- Re: Unpartial Halt Deciders1Richard Damon
18 Apr 25  +* Re: Unpartial Halt Deciders2Keith Thompson
18 Apr 25  i`- Re: Unpartial Halt Deciders1Alan Mackenzie
19 Apr 25  `* Re: Unpartial Halt Deciders20olcott
19 Apr 25   +* Re: Unpartial Halt Deciders2Fred. Zwarts
19 Apr 25   i`- Re: Unpartial Halt Deciders1Keith Thompson
19 Apr 25   `* Re: Unpartial Halt Deciders17Richard Damon
19 Apr 25    `* Re: Unpartial Halt Deciders16Richard Damon
19 Apr 25     +- Re: Unpartial Halt Deciders1Alan Mackenzie
19 Apr 25     +* Re: Unpartial Halt Deciders4Keith Thompson
19 Apr 25     i`* Re: Unpartial Halt Deciders --- category error 23olcott
20 Apr 25     i +- Re: Unpartial Halt Deciders --- category error 21Richard Damon
20 Apr 25     i `- Re: Unpartial Halt Deciders --- category error 21Fred. Zwarts
19 Apr 25     +* Re: Unpartial Halt Deciders --- category error9olcott
19 Apr 25     i+- Re: Unpartial Halt Deciders --- category error1olcott
20 Apr 25     i+- Re: Unpartial Halt Deciders --- category error1Richard Damon
20 Apr 25     i+* Re: Unpartial Halt Deciders --- category error3Richard Damon
20 Apr 25     ii+- Re: Unpartial Halt Deciders --- category error1Keith Thompson
20 Apr 25     ii`- o,1Richard Damon
22 Apr 25     i`* Re: Unpartial Halt Deciders --- category error3joes
22 Apr 25     i `* The conventional HP is a Category Error2olcott
22 Apr 25     i  `- Re: The conventional HP is a Category Error1Richard Damon
20 Apr 25     `- Re: Unpartial Halt Deciders1Richard Damon

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal