Path: ...!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D)
Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2024 15:33:08 +0300
Organization: -
Lines: 43
Message-ID: <v4k1m4$3f99u$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v45tec$4q15$1@dont-email.me> <v4arp0$1a7uo$1@dont-email.me> <v4b1c3$3nf9n$3@i2pn2.org> <v4b50m$1f89t$5@dont-email.me> <v4c12r$3oop0$3@i2pn2.org> <v4cjl7$1o4b4$1@dont-email.me> <v4d991$3qbnc$1@i2pn2.org> <v4da12$1sioe$1@dont-email.me> <v4dbmf$3qbnc$3@i2pn2.org> <v4dcd6$1sioe$3@dont-email.me> <v4df0h$3qbnd$1@i2pn2.org> <v4dhf5$1tsdf$2@dont-email.me> <v4dja1$3qbnd$5@i2pn2.org> <v4djhf$1tsdf$6@dont-email.me> <v4dk7b$3qbnc$8@i2pn2.org> <v4dl3b$225kb$1@dont-email.me> <v4dn5u$3qbnd$8@i2pn2.org> <v4dop4$22o4a$2@dont-email.me> <v4dq07$3qbnc$12@i2pn2.org> <v4dqq0$2353n$1@dont-email.me> <v4el9m$3rsd6$3@i2pn2.org> <v4f3ec$2akmh$2@dont-email.me> <v4g65a$3tn6q$1@i2pn2.org> <v4g6vr$2ic0g$1@dont-email.me> <v4gc0b$3tn6r$6@i2pn2.org> <v4gcjc$2msea$1@dont-email.me> <v4geab$3tn6r$8@i2pn2.org> <v4gg0s$2nim8$2@dont-email.me> <v4ha63$3v16r$2@i2pn2.org> <v4hfq9$2sdqr$5@dont-email.me> <v4hp3r$3viml$1@i2pn2.org> <v4hv85$3021v$1@dont-email.me> <v4ju8f$222a$1@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2024 14:33:08 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="fb4ae353e280409bd8e10200d3ed0b1b";
	logging-data="3646782"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19w84XQHg+3rKzGWS6//rwt"
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:dKjZ8tXilQjjJy5QqiGPed8uSSw=
Bytes: 3857

On 2024-06-15 11:34:39 +0000, joes said:

> Am Fri, 14 Jun 2024 12:39:15 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>> On 6/14/2024 10:54 AM, joes wrote:
>>> Am Fri, 14 Jun 2024 08:15:52 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>> On 6/14/2024 6:39 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 6/14/24 12:13 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 6/13/2024 10:44 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 6/13/24 11:14 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 6/13/2024 10:04 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 6/13/24 9:39 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 6/13/2024 8:24 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/13/24 11:32 AM, olcott wrote:
> 
>>>> When H and D have a pathological relationship to each other then
>>>> H(D,D) is not being asked about the behavior of D(D). H1(D,D) has no
>>>> such pathological relationship thus D correctly simulated by H1 is the
>>>> behavior of D(D).
> What is H1 asked?
>>> H is asked whether its input halts, and by definition should give the
>>> (right) answer for every input.
>> If we used that definition of decider then no human ever decided
>> anything because every human has made at least one mistake.
> Yes. Humans are not machines.
>> I use the term "termination analyzer" as a close fit. The term partial
>> halt decider is more accurate yet confuses most people.

Olcott has used the term "termination analyzer", though whether he knows
what it means is unclear.

The main difference is that a halt decider or partial halt decider takes
descriptions of both a Turing machine (or other program) and an input and
determines whether that machine halts with that input but a termination
analyzer takes only the dexcription of a Turing machine (or other program)
and attempts to determine whether that machine halts with every input.
The term "analyzer" instead "decider" indicates that it may fail to
determine on some inputs and that it may produce additional information
that may be useful. The intent is to create termination analyzers that
are useful for practical purposes.

-- 
Mikko