51 pointsby mad12 hours ago6 comments
  • iFire20 minutes ago
    I don't use tla+ to model real-world systems anymore, Claude is able to model systems in Lean 4 and the binary executable can handle real input or I can directly generate c / rust on proofs with numeric types that have ring structure (integers, rationals, bits).

    https://github.com/lambdaclass/truth_research_zk

  • tmaly3 hours ago
    I remember NVIDA sponsored a TLA+ challenge last year https://foundation.tlapl.us/challenge/index.html
  • tombertan hour ago
    Claude has certainly been getting better with TLA+. It's not perfect yet but for laughs I got it to model the rules of Monopoly last night [1]. I haven't done any exhaustive checking on it yet, but it certainly looks passable.

    It is pretty impressive at how good it's gotten at this, in a relatively short amount of time no less. I still usually write my specs by hand, but who knows how much longer I'll be doing that.

    [1] https://pdfhost.io/v/KU2j37YKrP_Monopoly

    • ofrzeta13 minutes ago
      It looks quite complicated and I have no idea what it is doing. Obviously, since I don't know about TLA+. But what about someone who knows TLA+? It still seems hard to make sure it is valid. And it's just for a relatively simple game.
  • dgacmu3 hours ago
    This post reads like an accidental advertisement for approaches like Verus [1], which couple the implementation and verification so you can't end up with a model that diverges from the actual implementation. I'm personally much more optimistic about the verus approach, but I freely admit that's my builder bias speaking.

    [1] https://github.com/verus-lang/verus

  • asxndu2 hours ago
    [dead]
  • uptodatenews3 hours ago
    [dead]