lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Matrix grammar

message: This article uses a function W but does not define it. Is W(V) = V*? --137.158.142.58 (talk) 14:23, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

message: This article contains contradictory information.
In section Properties is says 
There exists some languages in MAT^\lambda which can not be produced by a context-sensitive grammar,
but then in section open problems is says that it's  it is neither known whether MAT^\lambda contains languages which are not context-sensitive.
I would guess that either the second information is outdated or its a typo meaning MAT (without \lambda),
but since there are both possibilities I didn't edit anything in the article.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.183.96.139 (talk) 19:41, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I checked Păun's book "Membrane Computing: An Introduction", and on page 32 it says CS - MAT^\lambda \neq \emptyset.  Somewhat further down the text the book says that it is still an open problem whether MAT^\lambda - CS is empty.  I fixed the last but one property in the present article accordingly.  (The corresponding pages of Păun's should normally be viewable via Gооgle Books.)   Scolobb (talk) 19:44, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradictory content
Talk:Metasyntax

message: Should this stub be mergerd into the Metalanguage article, or does this precise topic warrant an article of its own?
Stephan Leeds (talk) 13:13, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge "Metasyntax" stub into "Metalanguage" article? 

message: META II and its descendants are different then BNF metalanguages. They are programming languages. What is called non terminals in BNF are rules in these languages. A rule is a boolean function returning success or failure. A syntax rule is a test as are strings and symbols. Tokens, symbols and strings, would be terminals. However in CWIC you have programmed token rules.
syntax = $(rule \ char_class \ token);
id     .. let $(let | dgt | '_');
string .. '"' $(~'"') '"' MAKESTR[];
rule      = id "=" sequence ";" :RULE!2 gen_code[*1];
sequence  = test_seq (("\" backtrack:BCK|"/":ALT alternant)!2|.EMPTY);
backtrack = test_seq ("\" backtrack:BCK!2|.EMPTY);
alternant = test_seq ( "/" alternant:ALT!2|.EMPTY);
test_seq  = "(" sequence ")" | <(test | action) $(test | action)>;
test      = string | rule_call;
rule_call = id:CALL ("[" <arg_list> "]"!2 | !1);
action    = (":" id:NODE | "!" number:TREE | "<" sequence ">":LIST)!1;
A symbol or identifier is defined by a token '..' rule. Even let and dgt  in the id token rule are defined by a character class rule. SYNTAX and TOKEN rules are boolean functions returning success or failure. Character class rule define tests that are used in other rules. Generally inline code.
dgt: '0'|'1'|'2'|'3'|'4'|'5'|'6'|'7'|'8'|'9';
These metasyntax metalanguages do not fit the description  in artical.
Steamerandy (talk) 21:42, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Metacompiler metalanguage syntax
Talk:Noncontracting grammar

message: According to the article, a grammar is essentially noncontracting if it contains the production S\to\varepsilon. But if S is allowed to occur in any right-hand side, that would mean that the essentially noncontracting grammars generate the rec. enumerable languages! Should In that case, S may not occur in the right-hand side of any production. be added? -- UKoch (talk) 14:45, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Definitely. Fixed. Rp (talk) 09:00, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  S -> empty 

message: On the need for citation: what sort of citation is good enough? This is easy and it's in many textbooks, e.g. this one. Rp (talk) 09:00, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: It would be nice to at least have citations for the properties discussed in the final section. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 09:11, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  What sort of citation needed? 

message: Kuroda normal form also exists for unrestricted grammars. See ref I added in there. JMP EAX (talk) 15:29, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  K 

message: By the way, who discovered these noncontracting grammars and their [weak] equivalence to [Chomsky's 1959] CSG def? JMP EAX (talk) 15:38, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: After I checked out that 1963 source, he does define them, but calls them "type 1 grammar" on p. 360. JMP EAX (talk) 21:28, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Q 

message: I just spent some time trying to make this article easier to understand.  More can be done; for instance, I'm not sure if the explicit conversion procedure to context-sensitive form adds all that much.
One major obstacle remains: noncontracting grammars are not the same thing as context-sensitive grammars in the Chomsky sense, but they are so closely related that the term context-sensitive grammars is applied to both, and their articles are bound to contain a lot of duplication, or worse, inconsistencies (such as in treatment of the empty string).
I think the only good way to resolve this is to merge them.  It would be even better to also fold in Kuroda normal form.  Doing this will make it easier for editors to stick to one consistent storyline and terminology.
What do you think? Rp (talk) 19:27, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge?
Talk:Omega language

message: If you say something is decidable unqualified then that means it's decidable by a Turing Machine. There is no way that membership of the language $\{a\}^\omega$ over the alphabet $\Sigma=\{a,b\}$ is decidable by a Turing machine. The articles on similar topics seem to make similar dubious or incorrect claims.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.172.100.253 (talk) 17:04, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  How can membership of $\omega$-regular languages be decidable?
Talk:Recognizable language

message: Must the FSM accept L (and perhaps more) as input or exactly L as input? - 129.100.75.90 17:13, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Since the set of all strings is recognizable, the first would encompass all possible languages.  It would be good to have an actual reference though.  Zarboublian (talk) 21:28, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

text: Sorry but this is a misunderstanding! The fact that both language families are sometimes abbreviated by REC does not mean they are the same. Recognizable refers to an algebraic definition of the regular languages (using monoids or equivalence of strings). I undid the redirect. Jochgem (talk) 10:48, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Tourism in Colombia

message: General content about the people: population, government, economy, language, religion, food, customs, etc. doesn't belong in a tourism article.  has articles where the content might be appropriate. — JJMC89 (T·C) 04:55, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Off topic content
Talk:Agriculture in Colombia

message: There has been a slow-moving edit war here over the inclusion of this see also link.  Reasons as provided in past edit summaries:
*Anti-inclusion: "unnecessary information, coca is illegal in Colombia"; "Colombia achieved a great decrease in cocaine production, leading White House drug czar R. Gil Kerlikowske to announce that Colombia is no longer the world's biggest producer of cocaine"; "vandalism"
*Pro-inclusion: "it may be illegal but it is nonetheless an agricultural product (and fairly important economically) and this article doesn't cover it"; "this is an agricultural product that is not trivial economically - even if colombia is no longer the world's #1 producer, doesn't mean it shouldn't be included here"
I would also add that according to our articles, coca production employs 67,000 households, whereas coffee production employs 566,000 households. As an additional point of comparison, cut flowers provide 94,000 direct jobs.  I believe that coca production is significant enough to merit a see also link in this article. Maybe it would be undue weight to give equal space to coffee and coca in this article, but I don't think that a see also link is inappropriate. Calliopejen1 (talk) 21:23, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Another relevant statistic: coca represented 3% of GDP related to the agricultural sector in Colombia in 2012.  Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:47, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dispute over inclusion of see also link to [[Coca production in Colombia]] 

message: *I totally agree with theryx7, this link is irrelevant about agriculture in colombia, coca production is illegal and coca is more related to the mafia and not with the Colombian agriculture as such, the link should not be placed. --The Battle Knight (talk) 21:50, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Third opinions 
Talk:Semantics encoding

message: Does not it miss T_A^1 \longrightarrow^* T_A^2? So it will be
For every term T_A^1 of language A and every terms T_B^2 of language B, if [T_A^1] \longrightarrow^* T_B^2 then there exists some T_A^2 such that T_B^2 = [T_A^2] and T_A^1 \longrightarrow^* T_A^2.
--Beroal (talk) 15:42, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Preservation of reductions; completeness
Talk:Accesso ShoWare Center

message: This entry should be deleted. There will be no Amiga Center in Kent. See http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003813881_kentarena31m.html 82.215.240.162 08:12, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: In August 2022, the ShoWare center was given a new JumboTron. Should we add that? Letsgotbirds (talk) 04:14, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Jumbotron?
Talk:String operations

message: Naive question: In "String substitution" we read that the a substitution "... is a mapping f that maps letters ... to languages"; but in "String homomorphism" we read that a homomorphism "... is a string substitution such that each letter is replaced by a single string". Now strings are categorically distinct from languages (aren't they?), so surely a substitution can't be defined both as something that maps letters to languages and also as something that maps letters to strings. It seems confusing at best. --Bmcm (talk) 12:22, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Hopcroft and Ullman, after having defined substitutions and strings (on p.60) in the same way as in the article, add the following remark: "We generally take h(a) [for a homomorphism h] to be the string itself, rather than the set containing that string." A similar remark should be added in the article. - Jochen Burghardt (talk) 17:59, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Substitution: maps to languages or to strings or either? 

message: As noted on ß, there is an uppercase form of the letter ß, namely ẞ. There is nothing theoretically wrong with the example, but the wording "no uppercase char available" might be rephrased to reflect this fact. (It's funny how using examples from ordinary languages often backfires.) Lasse Hillerøe Petersen (talk) 09:15, 3 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  The example of substitution using ß ~ SS is not entirely correct
Talk:Trace monoid

message: There is a problem with the current statement of Levi's lemma. It reads
A strong form of Levi's lemma holds for traces. Specifically, if uv\equiv xy for strings u, v, x, y, then there exist strings z_1, z_2, z_3 and z_4 such that (z_2,z_3)\in I_D, and
:u\equiv z_1z_2\qquad v=z_3z_4
:x\equiv z_1z_3\qquad y=z_2z_4
which cannot be correct, because it implies that u and v have the same length.  In particular, when I_D is empty, it should say the same thing as the string version of Levi's lemma. Algernon (talk) 14:52, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Properties

message: The article currently contains the following sentence: "The trace monoid is universal, in that all homomorphic monoids are in fact isomorphic." This does not seem to be a meaningful mathematical sentence. Does anyone know what was intended by this remark?
:See Universal property ? 67.198.37.16 (talk) 03:37, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Universal property? 

message: The paragraph in the introduction beginning "Trace monoids are commonly used to model concurrent computation, forming the foundation for process calculi" does not refer to anything in the rest of the artucle and is unsourced.  Can anyone expand on this?  Deltahedron (talk) 21:58, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the references support this claim, unless you want to argue about how "commonly" this might be, or the degree to which it is "foundational"...? 67.198.37.16 (talk) 03:39, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Concurrent computation 

message: Are all trace monoids syntactic monoids?  The construction for non-commutative free monoids, as the syntactic monoid of the even-length palindromes, fails dramatically for free commutative monoids, as their syntactic monoids are then finite groups!  The assertion "Thus, the trace monoid is a syntactic monoid." needs some justification. --RichardW57 (talk) 20:41, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: It is, in fact, easy to show that any equivalence relation on \Sigma^* that satisfies \forall w,v,x,y\,(w\equiv v\leftrightarrow xwy\equiv xvy) is a syntactic congruence, hence the reason given on this page is correct (even if lacking a proper citation). See my answer at Stack Exchange.—Emil J. 08:22, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  As Syntactic Monoids
Talk:Van Wijngaarden grammar

message: Although this formalism is historically associated with Algol 68, it is technically just a particular type of grammar formalism; the article should really devote itself to describing the formalism and giving examples, with the Algol 68 connection dangling somewhere at the bottom.  Help is welcomed ... Rp (talk) 15:14, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

message: In References section, the link for “A W-Grammar Description for ADA” is broken. I searched the web and could find nothing available on‑line. Should the link be removed a reference be given without a link? --Hibou57 (talk) 09:00, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Broken link for A W-Grammar Description for ADA
Talk:Weighted context-free grammar

message: Weighted and stochastic CFGs are equivalent, as established by the WCFG article. We could discuss both in one article. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 13:37, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with merge, and merging to separate section (given the distinction between them). Note also the target page name change that occurred in the interim (doesn't change the arguments for the merge). Klbrain (talk) 00:57, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge with [[Stochastic context-free grammar]]
Talk:Billy Reil

message: I got some message cos I added to the overwhelming amount of bullshit this page has only because it was brought to my attention in a forum that this page exists with said bullshit. Delete the page or take out the bullshit or let us all chime in with more bullshit but dont police what i add and leave in glaring factually incorrect crap such as him making cm punk and such.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.74.90.193 (talk) 05:28, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  so much of this is bullshit 

message: Someone who is obsessed with Billy Reil has been editing this page over the past few years even asking wiki to delete the page. However, It would be better to delete the page rather to have a page filled with non-facts. For one, Billy Reil's twitter account is not @billyreilwwe, that page is a parody acount and the author of the page also is the person who has edited this wiki page to contain bullshit non-facts and slanderous accounts of events. For whatever reason this author has been impersonating reil over a period of years. Reil can not understand why somebody would spend so much time in their life impersonating him , but reil does want his wiki page to contain lies about him and the people he cares about. Whoever is in charge of this wiki page, please edit this page back to what it was. As for the impersonator, get a life bro.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.245.52.32 (talk) 19:24, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Insanity
Talk:Chordal graph

message: I think that written like this, the characterization of chordal graphs with intersection graphs is incorrect. If we read the sentence, we have the impression that chordal=subtree overlap, which is false. I guess it should be intersecting subtrees, and not overlaping subtrees.
(see F. Gavril, The intersection graphs of subtrees in trees are exactly the chordal graphs, J. Combinatorial Th. (B), 16(1974)47-56.)
I don't think the chromatic number of a chordal graph equals its clique number. Consider K_n and attach a dangling edge to one of its vertices. It is chordal, its clique number is n and its chromatic number is n+1.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.49.197.167 (talk) 05:10, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You are mistaken. The dangling vertex may be given the same color as any of the other vertices except its neighbor, so only n colors are needed. —David Eppstein (talk) 05:15, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

message: Must chords always be a single edge? What about the segment A-B-C in this graph? If this is not a chord, then what is it called?
  O-O-A-O-O
 /    |    \
O     B     O
 \    |    /
  O-O-C-O-O
If A-B-C is not a chord, then does that mean that all 3 cycles in this graph are chord-less, even though one of them is obviously divided by the other two?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.27.92.148 (talk) 12:50, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, chords have to be single edges, so your graph is not chordal. Which of the three cycles is the one that is divided by the other two? The graph structure does not specify an inside or an outside, so you could as easily have drawn path A-B-C around the outside and one of the other paths from A to C down the middle. I don't think there's a name for "graphs in which each cycle has a path between two non-consecutive vertices", although the case you've drawn where the whole graph consists of three paths between a pair of nodes is usually called a theta graph (because if you turn it sideways it has the shape of the greek letter theta, Θ). —David Eppstein (talk) 15:31, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

text: That reference uses "rigid circuit graph" to mean a chordal graph (see middle of p.851) and states that a graph is a rigid circuit graph if and only if the process of deleting simplicial vertices succeeds in deleting all vertices (bottom of p.851), which is essentially the definition of an elimination ordering. So yes, it's a good reference. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:02, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chord segments?
Talk:List of people involved with the French Resistance

message: Wouldn't it be better if we could have provided a more detailed account of how these people contributed to the Resistance and maybe like provide some resources for their involvement. It would make the article look more organized too.
Respectfully, 
Selim — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tim! (talk • contribs) 17:14, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Shouldn't this be called, List of people in the French Resistance? Calling it, "People *involved* with the French Resistance" would include individuals like Carltheo Zeitschel and Klaus Barbie, and I don't think that is what is meant for inclusion in this article. Mathglot (talk) 10:08, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title change
Talk:Minima Moralia

message: To describe the work as "a seminal text in Critical Theory" does not seem entirely accurate. Even though related to critical theory, I fail to see this work as an attempt in theory, or as an attempt in science overall, rather than as an attempt in philosophy. Or perhaps I have not fully understood the meaning of the concept "Critical Theory", but if this work represents "Critical Theory", then "Critical Theory" has misused if not misunderstood the whole concept of theory.
It's a core part of what people who read critical theory read, canonical as such; the Frankfurt school, at least the famous ones, tended to conflate philosophy with theory as being essentially the same thing, since true theory and true philosophy would discover the injustices and horrors at the root of human reality as experienced during their time. It very well might be that they misunderstood theory. They've always been considered idiosyncratic. 50.153.135.137 (talk) 06:56, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Misc

message: Although I like most of what this article has to say, there are basic problems with it, for example, not even such basic information as the original German-language date of publication is given; and much of the information seems to be subjective analysis without adequate citation of whose analysis this is (obviously Adorno, for example, doesn't directly make a comparison between Mussolini and Berlusconi, etc.). (93.41.128.99 (talk) 01:38, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problems
Category talk:Wales national football team managers

message: Verheijen didn't ever have a caretaker role with the Wales team. Following the death of Gary Speed it was Osian Roberts who took control of the team after Verheijen resigned. Also, prior to Speed's appointment, Brian Flynn took charge of two qualifying matches as caretaker. Blogdroed (talk) 15:16, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Verheijen and Flynn
Talk:Valsesia

message: Photos
The above link was placed by the original author of the article, User:Fotogian, who seems to be the owner of the website. It is probably a good link: he is a good photographer. But to avoid conflicts of interest/self-promotion issues, I thought it might be a good idea to get a second opinion. I’ve therefore moved it here. —Ian Spackman 08:44, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Links
Talk:Artuklu Palace

message: *Artuklu Palace 2
*"Artukid Palace" -Llc 19
*"Artuqid Palace" -Llc 14
-- Takabeg (talk) 05:39, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Binghamstown

message: I agree that this article should be merged with "Binghamstown", but keep the gaelic name of the village on the same pageJGaynard 14:08, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Josh Hill (footballer)

message: Wouldn't this Josh be short for Joshua like the others, or was it just Josh from birth? There is also a Josh Hill in MMA who I am considering making an article for, he is undefeated so far, in the Canadian Score Fighting Series. Nym (talk) 23:21, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Joshua

message: In the Wiki-way - what was adding unsourced to the page, made news and is now sourced. Not sure how this should be reflected on page. Looking for guidance, I posted to the BLP Noticeboard about it. MaskedSinger (talk) 05:25, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Are there BLP-good sources? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:14, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Becoming a dad
Talk:Worried About Ray

message: Who is Ray?
:W.A.R.? <B>Troubleshooter</B> 03:11, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ray is Ray Harryhausen, film director and pioneer of the use of stop frame animation in live action movies. In the main article Harryhausen's name is maked "citation required" but the fact is self evident from the video accompanying the single in which a fourth member of the band "Ray" seems not to fit in with the other three and spends an unhealthy amount of time constructing and animating models of monsters and mythical creatures in the privacy of his room. 83.104.249.240 20:01, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

message: As title says, because that seems odd and non referenced  Iamthinking2202 (talk) 03:55, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Was a Billy Joel song actually the B side?
Talk:Ralph L. Boyce

message: Sorry guys, first article ever. Please let me know what went well, and what didn't...
--Djpeirano 09:24, 31 July 2007 (UTC)