89 pointsby pizza3 hours ago16 comments
  • DoctorOetker8 minutes ago
    I'm still reading this, but if this checks out, this is one of the most significant discoveries in years.

    Why use splines or polynomials or haphazardly chosen basis functions if you can just fit (gradient descent) your data or wave functions to the proper computational EML tree?

    Got a multidimensional and multivariate function to model (with random samples or a full map)? Just do gradient descent and convert it to approximant EML trees.

    Perform gradient descent on EML function tree "phi" so that the derivatives in the Schroedinger equation match.

    But as I said, still reading, this sounds too good to be true, but I have witnessed such things before :)

  • lioeters8 minutes ago
    > A calculator with just two buttons, EML and the digit 1, can compute everything a full scientific calculator does

    Reminds me of the Iota combinator, one of the smallest formal systems that can be combined to produce a universal Turing machine, meaning it can express all of computation.

  • entaloneralie21 minutes ago
    This is amazing! I love seeing FRACTRAN-shaped things on the homepage :) This reminds me of how 1-bit stacks are encoded in binary:

    A stack of zeros and ones can be encoded in a single number by keeping with bit-shifting and incrementing.

        Pushing a 0 onto the stack is equivalent to doubling the number.
        Pushing a 1 is equivalent to doubling and adding 1.
        Popping is equivalent to dividing by 2, where the remainder is the number.
    
    I use something not too far off for my daily a programming based on a similar idea:

    Rejoice is a concatenative programming language in which data is encoded as multisets that compose by multiplication. Think Fractran, without the rule-searching, or Forth without a stack.

    https://wiki.xxiivv.com/site/rejoice

  • krick17 minutes ago
    > using EML trees as trainable circuits ..., I demonstrate the feasibility of exact recovery of closed-form elementary functions from numerical data at shallow tree depths up to 4

    That's awesome. I always wondered if there is some way to do this.

  • qiller24 minutes ago
    For completeness, there is also Peirce’s arrow aka NOR operation which is functionally complete. Fun applications iirc VMProtect copy protection system has an internal VM based on NOR.

    Quick google seach brings up https://github.com/pr701/nor_vm_core, which has a basic idea

  • simplesighman38 minutes ago
    > For example, exp(x)=eml(x,1), ln(x)=eml(1,eml(eml(1,x),1)), and likewise for all other operations

    I read the paper. Is there a table covering all other math operations translated to eml(x,y) form?

    • sandrocksand7 minutes ago
      I think what you want is the supplementary information, part II "completeness proof sketch" on page 12. You already spotted the formulas for "exp" and real natural "L"og; then x - y = eml(L(x), exp(y)) and from there apparently it is all "standard" identities. They list the arithmetic operators then some constants, the square root, and exponentials, then the trig stuff is on the next page.

      You can find this link on the right side of the arxiv page:

      https://arxiv.org/src/2603.21852v2/anc/SupplementaryInformat...

    • 3 minutes ago
      undefined
    • saratogacx21 minutes ago
      last page of the PDF has several tree's that represent a few common math functions.
    • jmyeet16 minutes ago
      I was curious about that too. Gemini actually gave a decent list. Trig functions come from Euler's identity:

          e^ix = cos x + i sin x
      
      which means:

          e^-ix = cos -x + i sin -x
                = cos x - i sin x
      
      so adding them together:

         e^ix + e^-ix = 2 cos x
         cos x = (e*ix - e^-ix) / 2
      
      So I guess the real part of that.

      Multiplication, division, addition and subtraction are all straightforward. So are hyperbolic trig functions. All other trig functions can be derived as per above.

  • noobermin7 minutes ago
    I don't mean to shit on their interesting result, but exp or ln are not really that elementary themselves... it's still an interesting result, but there's a reason that all approximations are done using series of polynomials (taylor expansion).
  • tripdoutan hour ago
    Interesting, but is the required combination of EML gates less complex than using other primitives?
  • nonfamousan hour ago
    How would an architecture with a highly-optimized hardware implementation of EML compare with a traditional math coprocessor?
    • wildzzzan hour ago
      Dreadfully slow for integer math but probably some similar performance to something like a CORDIC for specific operations. If you can build an FPU that does exp() and ln() really fast, it's simple binary tree traversal to find the solution.
      • AlotOfReading20 minutes ago
        You already have an FPU that approximates exp() and ln() really fast, because float<->integer conversions approximate the power 2 functions respectively. Doing it accurately runs face-first into the tablemaker's dilemma, but you could do this with just 2 conversions, 2 FMAs (for power adjustments), and a subtraction per. A lot of cases would be even faster. Whether that's worth it will be situational.
  • jekudean hour ago
    What would physical EML gates be implemented in reality?

    Posts like these are the reason i check HN every day

  • peterlkan hour ago
    Reminds me a bit of the coolest talk I ever got to see in person: https://youtu.be/FITJMJjASUs?si=Fx4hmo77A62zHqzy

    It’s a derivation of the Y combinator from ruby lambdas

    • Analemma_an hour ago
      If you've never worked through a derivation/explanation of the Y combinator, definitely find one (there are many across the internet) and work through it until the light bulb goes off. It's pretty incredible, it almost seems like "matter ex nihilo" which shouldn't work, and yet does.

      It's one of those facts that tends to blow minds when it's first encountered, I can see why one would name a company after it.

    • thaumasiotesan hour ago
      Have you gone through The Little Schemer?

      More on topic:

      > No comparable primitive has been known for continuous mathematics: computing elementary functions such as sin, cos, sqrt, and log has always required multiple distinct operations.

      I was taught that these were all hypergeometric functions. What distinction is being drawn here?

  • hyperhelloan hour ago
    > eml(x,y)=exp(x)-ln(y)

    Exp and ln, isn't the operation its own inverse depending on the parameter? What a neat find.

    • thaumasiotes18 minutes ago
      > isn't the operation its own inverse depending on the parameter?

      This is a function from ℝ² to ℝ. It can't be its own inverse; what would that mean?

  • supermdguyan hour ago
    Next step is to build an analog scientific calculator with only EML gates
  • selcukaan hour ago
    So, like brainf*ck (the esoteric programming language), but for maths?
  • zephenan hour ago
    Judging by the title, I thought I would have a good laugh, like when the doctor discovered numerical integration and published a paper.

    But no...

    This is about continuous math, not ones and zeroes. Assuming peer review proves it out, this is outstanding.

    • paulpauper2 minutes ago
      I don't think this is ever making it past the editor of any journal, let alone peer review.

      Elementary functions such as exponentiation, logarithms and trigonometric functions are the standard vocabulary of STEM education. Each comes with its own rules and a dedicated button on a scientific calculator;

      What?

      and No comparable primitive has been known for continuous mathematics: computing elementary functions such as sin, cos, √ , and log has always required multiple distinct operations. Here we show that a single binary operator

      Yeah, this is done by using tables and series. His method does not actually facilitate the computation of these functions.

      There is no such things as "continuous mathematics". Maybe he meant to say continuous function?

      The whole thing comes off a gibberish or rediscovering something that already exists.

  • BobbyTables22 hours ago
    How does one actually add with this?
    • bzaxan hour ago
      Well, once you've derived unary exp and ln you can get subtraction, which then gets you unary negation and you have addition.
    • nick23835 minutes ago
      Don't know adding, but multiplication has diagram on the last page of the PDF.

      xy = eml(eml(1, eml(eml(eml(eml(1, eml(eml(1, eml(1, x)), 1)), eml(1, eml(eml(1, eml(y, 1)), 1))), 1), 1)), 1)

      From Table 4, I think addition is slightly more complicated?

      • Charon779 minutes ago
        x+y = ln(exp(x) * exp(y))

        exp(a) = eml(a, 1) ln(a)=eml(1,eml(eml(1,a),1))

        Plugging those in is an excercise to the reader