Skip to content

Conversation

@ibbem
Copy link
Collaborator

@ibbem ibbem commented Dec 13, 2025

This is the formalization of succinctness as advertised in my master thesis "On the Succinctness of
Languages for Static Variability".

Note that there are merge conflicts between thesis_bm and main. Hence, this branch already includes the merge to main and should be merged using a fast-forward merge.

ibbem added 30 commits July 10, 2025 20:37
This is the first definition has come to my mind. It works at least for
ADT < CCC intuitively.
I expect `2CC < CCC` so `ADT < CCC` should follow using transitivity.
As ≤Size is not total, <Size is not transitive without requiring ≤Size.
Moreover, ≱Size is not antisymmetric. Note that ≱Size is ¬ ≤Size with
the arguments flipped and the negation moved inside.
This makes it easier to use because the artifact type doesn't need to be
applied when invoking `≤Size`. Furthermore, this enables proofs of
`≱Size` to fix a single artifact type, for example the natural numbers,
and automatically have the inhabitants it needs.

The order between the quantifier over `n` and `A` doesn't have a big
impact. On the one hand, the chosen order allows `≱Size` to use
different artifact types for each `n`. However, it doesn't change the
relation inhabitants if they are swapped because there exists a type
with enough elements (i.e., union of all `A` ranging all `n`s) that can
be fixed and then only a subset of the artifacts can be used for a
specific `n`. On the other hand, `≤Size` is a `Set` and, thus, can't be
inspected if the order is changed. This specific order is chosen purely
as it's more convenient for pattern matching (e.g., one less `with`
clause in case of `≤Size`).
Previously, these where not inferred correctly, but now it works™.
This reduces duplication and allows refactoring of 𝔸.
This allows to easily add more fields.
ibbem added 30 commits September 7, 2025 11:28
The designed succinctness definition includes a translatable constraint
that the old definition was missing. This gets rid of the unfortunate
`¬Compiler→¬≤` and `¬Compiler→≤` properties.

A drawback of this new definition is that it breaks transitivity.
Consider some languages L1 and L3 that are complete and a language L2
that is incomplete. There is an expression e in L1 that cannot be
translated to L2. If we have L1 <= L2 and L2 <= L3 we cannot conclude L1
<= L3 because we know nothing about the size of e translated to L3
because we just proved that there exists no translation to L2.

Note that the order of `∀ (A : 𝔸)` and `Σ[ m ∈ ℕ ]` was changed. Due to
parametricity (type parameters cannot be inspected) this does not change
the actual semantics of the definitions. However, it does simplify the
proofs by being friendlier to pattern matching and `with` clauses
avoiding additional helper functions in many cases.
This makes the names consistent with the symbol that is used now.
This merge introduces succinctness as explored in my master thesis
"On the Succinctness of Languages for Static Variability."
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants