Hello Metamath Community,

I'm still new here. So let me explain my intention, what I want here. My
original motivation comes from combinatorics. I am interested in the
relationship between the specification of an algebraic structure (such
as directed or undirected graph, magma resp. groupoid, semigroup, group,
topological space, partition, etc.) and the sequence that indicates how
many non-isomorphic instances of the structure there are over a set with
n elements, where n=0,1,2,3,.... . These sequences are published on
oeis.org: A273, A88, A1329, A27851, A1, A1930, A41,... . For some of
them, a generating algorithm (in some programming language) is also
given. However, in none of these sequences is a formal specification of
the underlying algebraic structure given, although this is often much
simpler than the generating algorithm.

My impression so far is that the desired specifications can be created
with MetaMath without any effort, as long as they are not already
contained in set.mm. A real challenge would probably be to verify the
specified algorithms against the specifications. It seems to me that a
basis of theorems would have to be created first. In particular, Polya's
counting theorem would need to be formalised. But perhaps one of you
knows what already exists on this topic and can be used.

Irrespective of this, it also seems worthwhile to me to create a bridge
between MetaMath and OEIS in such a way that MetaMath specifications are
added to corresponding sequences. The aim here could be to improve the
findability of sequences. For example, the additional criterion that the
elements of the carrier set are to be regarded as different (labelled)
could be achieved by adding an independent complete order relation. For
example, compare the sequences A88 with A53763, A273 with A2416, A41
with A110 or A1930 with A798. So you can see the first sequence is for
each pair the unlabelled version. And the second ones yield the labelled
version.

I see a need for action that goes far beyond my areas of different
expertises. The question now arises as to whether there are people in
your community who are willing and able to support me in my search of a
bridge as mentioned above. I have to admit that I have not yet delved
very deeply into MetaMath and set.mm. If I find someone here, I really
will have chance in order to acquire the necessary knowledge and skills.
I am hopefully very convinced that MetaMath makes a decisive
contribution to the further development of mathematics and computer
science by formalising important statements.

With best wishes,
Peter Dolland

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Metamath" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/metamath/6bc5c9e0-2990-411a-b943-e41bcbb75b13%40gmx.de.

Reply via email to