Your submission submit/3263806 has been assigned the permanent arXiv
identifier 2007.10288 and is available at:

[http://arxiv.org/abs/2007.10288](https://arxiv.org/abs/2007.10288)

 
The paper password for this article is:
Please share this with your co-authors. They may use it to claim ownership.


Abstract will appear in today's mailing as:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\\
arXiv:2007.10288
From: Marius Buliga <>
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2020 19:31:07 GMT   (2941kb,D)

Title: Graph rewrites, from graphic lambda calculus, to chemlambda, to directed
  interaction combinators
Authors: Marius Buliga
Categories: cs.LO cs.AI math.LO
Comments: arXiv admin note: text overlap with arXiv:2003.14332
License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
\\
  Here I report about the modifications of and relations between graphic lambda
calculus, various formalisms which appeared under the name chemlambda and a
version of directed interaction combinators. This is part of the study and
experiments with the artificial chemistry chemlambda and the relations with
lambda calculus or interaction combinators, as described in arXiv:2003.14332
and available from the entry page at https://chemlambda.github.io/index.html

___

Dear moderator,

Indeed, the submission is a completion of arXiv:2003.14332. But there are several other parts of the project described in arXiv:2003.14332 which will be added. This is a project which spans over more than 10 years and connects domains like sub-riemannian geometry with logic. There are several problems with a monolithic submission.

Instead I want to:
- use arXiv:2003.14332 as a stem which directs mainly to what is presented in https://chemlambda.github.io/index.html
- to replace in the future arXiv:2005:06060 with a more detailed version about the graph quines
- to submit another piece dedicated to the relation with lambda calculus and interaction combinators, in as much detail as possible
- to replace arXiv:1807.02058 with an up to date version, qhich is conform with the next item
- to submit a piece about the pure see language when ready https://mbuliga.github.io/quinegraphs/puresee.html
- to explain in another piece how pure see is a particular, commutative case of a more general formalism which connects with arXiv:0810.5042
- finally to update arXiv:2003.14332 when all the pieces are in place.
Therefore this piece I submitted is used as the place which describes for humans (otherwise why not just read the programs from the linked repositories?) the relations and motivations of the choices of the graph rewrites I use, which go beyond the logic part.

In a monolithic version, if I discover or if I am asked to explain in more detail something about one of the pieces, this would create the need of a new update of arXiv:2003.14332.

Finally, another reason for a separate submission is that because this experiment is online from some years, there is substantial confusion about which version and details people are talking about. Therefore in itself this piece is very useful as a reference which can be easily browsed by a human looking to understand about what is discussed.

That is why I prefer a modular approach. To just update arXiv:2003.14332 with a piece is not OK for my project.

I send this detailed answer in the hope you reconsider the submission.

Thank you,
Marius Buliga

----- Original Message -----
From: "help" <help@arxiv.org>
To: "mbuliga" <>
Sent: Thursday, July 9, 2020 10:29:08 PM
Subject: [arXiv #327529] arXiv: submit/3263806 removed

Dear arXiv user,

We have identified your article as an erratum/addendum/supplement of your previous submission, arXiv: 2003.14332. Typically, we do not accept supplemental materials as a separate submission as they are of low archival interest (i.e., Would someone cite it without the main document?). As a result, we have removed your submission and invite you to fold it into a replacement of the original.

For instructions on replacing existing submissions, please see:

https://arXiv.org/help/replace

Note that we accept only complete, self-contained replacements. You may do either of the following:

1) bundle the original and erratum/addendum as separate files in the submission package, or

2) submit the original manuscript altered to reflect the corrections and/or additions made in the erratum/addendum.

Please tell us if there is a reason why resubmitting this supplement as a replacement is not preferable.


Regards,
arXiv admin