Re: My reviewers think that halt deciders must report on the behavior of their caller

Op 10.jul.2025 om 16:43 schreef olcott:

On 7/10/2025 6:08 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 09.jul.2025 om 15:35 schreef olcott:

On 7/9/2025 4:09 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 08.jul.2025 om 21:49 schreef olcott:

 

>
*It is shown here*
https://liarparadox.org/HHH(DDD)_Full_Trace.pdf
Because we have multiple levels of emulation the
instructions of each level are mixed together as
they actually occur in the execution trace.

>
So, why don't you include the code? Apparently belongs to the input. If not, why would HHH produce a trace of a non-input?
>

 The test program HHH was encoded to halt.
The program under test DDD specifies non-halting behavior.

No rebuttal, but, as usual, claims without evidence.

 

>
None of these are relevant.
*The only thing that is relevant is this portion*
>
  machine   stack     stack     machine    assembly
  address   address   data      code       language
  ========  ========  ========  =========  =============
[00002192][00103820][00000000] 55         push ebp      ; Begin main()
[00002193][00103820][00000000] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping
[00002195][0010381c][00002172] 6872210000 push 00002172 ; push DDD
[0000219a][00103818][0000219f] e833f4ffff call 000015d2 ; call HHH(DDD)
>
New slave_stack at:1038c4
Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation   Execution Trace Stored at:1138cc
[00002172][001138bc][001138c0] 55         push ebp      ; housekeeping
[00002173][001138bc][001138c0] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping
[00002175][001138b8][00002172] 6872210000 push 00002172 ; push DDD
[0000217a][001138b4][0000217f] e853f4ffff call 000015d2 ; call HHH(DDD)
New slave_stack at:14e2ec
[00002172][0015e2e4][0015e2e8] 55         push ebp      ; housekeeping
[00002173][0015e2e4][0015e2e8] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping
[00002175][0015e2e0][00002172] 6872210000 push 00002172 ; push DDD
[0000217a][0015e2dc][0000217f] e853f4ffff call 000015d2 ; call HHH(DDD)
Local Halt Decider: Infinite Recursion Detected Simulation Stopped

>
Indeed, it is relevant to show that HHH aborts with the invalid reason 'Infinite Recursion Detected'. There is no Infinite Recursion, there is only a finite recursion. One cycle later the simulation would reach a natural end.
>

 Neither HHH nor DDD would ever stop running unless HHH
aborts its simulation. The leading author of theory
of computation textbooks agreed that this is non-halting behavior.
 

As usual claims without evidence. If we do not change the input (which aborts after a few cycles o simulation), then the simulating HHH could reach the final halt state without abort.
You are confusing yourself by putting the HHH under test and the testing HHH in the same memory. It would be easier to understand for you if a copy of HHH was included in the input.