Post on 23-Jan-2017
Interaction P Systems
S. Doumanis and A Syropoulos
Xanthi, Greece
E-mail: gmcg@araneous.com
– p. 1/10
Is this the end or not?
Is the Turing machine the ultimate conceptualcomputing device?
– p. 2/10
Is this the end or not?
Is the Turing machine the ultimate conceptualcomputing device?
Unless you are a Pythagorean, there is no reason toaccept the universality of the Church-Turing Thesis.
– p. 2/10
Is this the end or not?
Is the Turing machine the ultimate conceptualcomputing device?
Unless you are a Pythagorean, there is no reason toaccept the universality of the Church-Turing Thesis.
Interaction and Concurrency are more primitive thansequential reading and writing a storage medium.
– p. 2/10
Is this the end or not?
Is the Turing machine the ultimate conceptualcomputing device?
Unless you are a Pythagorean, there is no reason toaccept the universality of the Church-Turing Thesis.
Interaction and Concurrency are more primitive thansequential reading and writing a storage medium.
Interactive systems are more expressive than arbitrarysequential processes and purely functional systems.
– p. 2/10
Some thoughts on termination
Typical conceptual computing devices deliver a resultonly when they terminate.
– p. 3/10
Some thoughts on termination
Typical conceptual computing devices deliver a resultonly when they terminate.
Organisms that cease to operate do not make up asuccess story.
– p. 3/10
Some thoughts on termination
Typical conceptual computing devices deliver a resultonly when they terminate.
Organisms that cease to operate do not make up asuccess story.
Modern computer based equipment that stopsoperating is considered total failure.
– p. 3/10
Some thoughts on termination
Typical conceptual computing devices deliver a resultonly when they terminate.
Organisms that cease to operate do not make up asuccess story.
Modern computer based equipment that stopsoperating is considered total failure.
Only continuous operation of operating systems makesthem reliable.
– p. 3/10
Why a new variant of P systems?
P systems suffer from Turingism!
– p. 4/10
Why a new variant of P systems?
P systems suffer from Turingism!
There is no agreement on the notion of success!
– p. 4/10
Why a new variant of P systems?
P systems suffer from Turingism!
There is no agreement on the notion of success!
Typical systems do not really interact with theirenvironment!
– p. 4/10
Why a new variant of P systems?
P systems suffer from Turingism!
There is no agreement on the notion of success!
Typical systems do not really interact with theirenvironment!
Multiple systems do not interact with other systems byusing the environment.
– p. 4/10
Why a new variant of P systems?
P systems suffer from Turingism!
There is no agreement on the notion of success!
Typical systems do not really interact with theirenvironment!
Multiple systems do not interact with other systems byusing the environment.
There is no notion of history (i.e., P systems do notremember).
– p. 4/10
A New Idea
No universal clock.
– p. 5/10
A New Idea
No universal clock.
P systems should live for ever!
– p. 5/10
A New Idea
No universal clock.
P systems should live for ever!
Computation should be continuous, while resultsshould be partially “delivered” (think of a turnstile thatcounts people continuously).
– p. 5/10
A New Idea
No universal clock.
P systems should live for ever!
Computation should be continuous, while resultsshould be partially “delivered” (think of a turnstile thatcounts people continuously).
There should be a continuous flow of information, data,etc.
– p. 5/10
A New Idea
No universal clock.
P systems should live for ever!
Computation should be continuous, while resultsshould be partially “delivered” (think of a turnstile thatcounts people continuously).
There should be a continuous flow of information, data,etc.
Special compartments might serve ashistory-recording compartments.
– p. 5/10
Interaction multiset rewriting rules
Interaction grammars have been introduced by Wegnerto specify streams (i.e., interactive time-sensitiveanalog of strings).
– p. 6/10
Interaction multiset rewriting rules
Interaction grammars have been introduced by Wegnerto specify streams (i.e., interactive time-sensitiveanalog of strings).
Interaction multiset rewriting rules are the interactiveanalog of multiset rewriting rules.
– p. 6/10
Interaction multiset rewriting rules
Interaction grammars have been introduced by Wegnerto specify streams (i.e., interactive time-sensitiveanalog of strings).
Interaction multiset rewriting rules are the interactiveanalog of multiset rewriting rules.
Rules have the form α → β, where β may be formedusing the “listening” operator “.” and the“nondeterministic choice” operator “+”.
– p. 6/10
Interaction multiset rewriting rules
Interaction grammars have been introduced by Wegnerto specify streams (i.e., interactive time-sensitiveanalog of strings).
Interaction multiset rewriting rules are the interactiveanalog of multiset rewriting rules.
Rules have the form α → β, where β may be formedusing the “listening” operator “.” and the“nondeterministic choice” operator “+”.
The “.” operator waits for input, while the “+” operatorselect nondeterministically an event from a list of inputevents.
– p. 6/10
Interaction P System
May have initial data, but, in principle, process streamscoming from the environment.
– p. 7/10
Interaction P System
May have initial data, but, in principle, process streamscoming from the environment.
Have a number of history compartments where datamay be stored.
– p. 7/10
Interaction P System
May have initial data, but, in principle, process streamscoming from the environment.
Have a number of history compartments where datamay be stored.
At each moment t the output compartment contains apartial result.
– p. 7/10
Interaction P System
May have initial data, but, in principle, process streamscoming from the environment.
Have a number of history compartments where datamay be stored.
At each moment t the output compartment contains apartial result.
The system “litters” the environment with “useless”data.
– p. 7/10
On their computational power
Remember: Interaction is more fundamental thanreading and writing to storage!
– p. 8/10
On their computational power
Remember: Interaction is more fundamental thanreading and writing to storage!
Ergo: Interaction P system ought to be moreexpressive than “conventional” P systems.
– p. 8/10
On their computational power
Remember: Interaction is more fundamental thanreading and writing to storage!
Ergo: Interaction P system ought to be moreexpressive than “conventional” P systems.
Side effect: They better model living organisms. . .
– p. 8/10
To Do List
To completely formally specify interaction P systems.
– p. 9/10
To Do List
To completely formally specify interaction P systems.
To see for what problems they are good for.
– p. 9/10
To Do List
To completely formally specify interaction P systems.
To see for what problems they are good for.
To use them for the simulation of living organisms.
– p. 9/10
To Do List
To completely formally specify interaction P systems.
To see for what problems they are good for.
To use them for the simulation of living organisms.
Any suggestions?
– p. 9/10
That’s all!
Thank you for your attention!
– p. 10/10