[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP3-776?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
stephen mallette updated TINKERPOP3-776:
----------------------------------------
Issue Type: Improvement (was: Wish)
> Grab bag of ideas around "traverser as particle."
> -------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: TINKERPOP3-776
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP3-776
> Project: TinkerPop 3
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: process
> Reporter: Marko A. Rodriguez
> Assignee: Marko A. Rodriguez
>
> *Background*
> A traverser is a discrete particle that moves over a graph. Every time a
> traverser moves, it makes a clone of itself in a processed called "splitting"
> ({{Traverser.split()}}). Each split traverser is identical to its parent in
> that there is no "loss of data" (e.g. bulk, sack) when a split occurs. Why
> "split"? When a traverser comes to a fork in the graph (e.g.
> {{out('knows')}}), it can either take one branch (no splitting required --
> "random walker") or it can take all branches (splitting required --
> "diffusing walker"). Gremlin was designed such that it takes all paths and
> thus, the traverser splits. The primary rationale for this fundamental design
> choice is that its more efficient to branch than choose as once data is
> touched, use it!
> *Applications*
> Are there aspects of particle physics/computing that we can steal which will
> allow us to do novel computations with Gremlin?
> 1. The idea of particle's splitting with the same bulk and merging with
> {{bulkA+bulkB}} allowed us to leverage Pascal's Triangle
> (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_triangle) for efficiently computing
> the number of paths to any particular vertex in a (multi-)rooted spanning
> tree (i.e. traversal). [*DONE*]
> 2. In physics there are particles and anti-particles. Annihilation occurs
> when an anti-particle interacts with a particle. If traverser bulks can take
> on negative values then when two traversers touch and their bulks' are
> summed, either constructive (they have the same sign {{++/--}}) or
> destructive (they have different signs {{+-/-+}}) interference occurs. If the
> sum equal 0, then the merged traverser dies (annihilation). Imagine emanating
> "positive" traversers from vertex A and "negative" traversers from vertex B.
> A {{repeat(out().groupCount('x'))}} would yield the "fuzzy difference"
> {{subgraph(A) - subgraph(B)}}. In essence, "give me everything related to A,
> that is not related to B." This is related to spreading activation potentials
> with inhibitory control in biological neural networks
> (http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/Neural_inhibition), where the entire
> local region around B can be pulled out of the traversal computation
> (analogous to "blinding" the traversal from touching particular areas of the
> graph). An interesting follow on would be to provide a way to do "lateral
> inhibition" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lateral_inhibition). Lets say
> there is a "fork in the road." A split would yield the same traverser down
> each fork. However, you could yield "positive traversers" down some branches
> and "negative traversers" down others in order to accentuate those traversal
> paths (subgraphs) that have a strong signal and downplay those paths
> (subgraphs) that have a weak signal. In application: "Give me everything
> {{out('friend')}} related to A, but inhibit everything {{out('family')}}
> along the way." This would yield a friendship subgraph where no vertices have
> family members in the graph (i.e. the friendship graph intersected with the
> complement of the family graph).
> 3. ...to be continued.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
