You're reading the public-facing archive of the Category Theory Zulip server.
To join the server you need an invite. Anybody can get an invite by contacting Matteo Capucci at name dot surname at gmail dot com.
For all things related to this archive refer to the same person.
Faré (Apr 11 2020 at 03:00):Is there a word for "both game-semantic and game-theoretic" ?
Is there a stream for game foo?
Jules Hedges (Apr 11 2020 at 09:56):Apart from about 4 or 5 papers tops, in my opinion there is close to zero overlap between game theory and game semantics
Jules Hedges (Apr 11 2020 at 09:57):Think about the theory of natural numbers and the theory of real numbers. They're both about numbers and there's a little surface similarity, but once you get into any depth there's pretty much zero overlap
Faré (Apr 11 2020 at 17:29):Yet, the project I'm working on is right at this overlap: decentralized applications using blockchain smart contracts as arbiters. Game theory applies so that incentives should be aligned to follow the protocol and not cheat or default or timeout. Game semantics applies to prove safety properties and/or to interactively convince the arbiter of who is right.
Haskell (Apr 21 2020 at 15:34):Hi, does anyone know of work on what might be called "compositional mechanism design"? AFAIK, you can't perform arbitrary computations on elicited truth values if the computations have effects, because that would disrupt the mechanism.
Haskell (Apr 21 2020 at 15:38):It would be great to be able to elicit truth valuations and treat them like ordinary inputs in programming and string them to outputs without having to worry about agents backpropagating on the program and hijacking it to get the personally desired outcome.