Compositionality Workshop

I’m excited! In early December I’m going to a workshop on ‘compositionality’, meaning how big complex things can be built by sticking together smaller, simpler parts:

Compositionality, December 5-9, workshop at the Simons Institute for the Theory of Computing, Berkeley. Organized by Samson Abramsky, Lucien Hardy and Michael Mislove.

In 2007 Jim Simons, the guy who helped invent Chern–Simons theory and then went on to make billions using math to run a hedge fund, founded a research center for geometry and physics on Long Island. More recently he’s also set up this institute for theoretical computer science, in Berkeley. I’ve never been there before.

‘Compositionality’ sounds like an incredibly broad topic, but since it’s part of a semester-long program on Logical structures in computation, this workshop will be aimed at theoretical computer scientists, who have specific ideas about compositionality. And these theoretical computer scientists tend to like category theory. After all, category theory is about morphisms, which you can compose.

Here’s the idea:

The compositional description of complex objects is a fundamental feature of the logical structure of computation. The use of logical languages in database theory and in algorithmic and finite model theory provides a basic level of compositionality, but establishing systematic relationships between compositional descriptions and complexity remains elusive. Compositional models of probabilistic systems and languages have been developed, but inferring probabilistic properties of systems in a compositional fashion is an important challenge. In quantum computation, the phenomenon of entanglement poses a challenge at a fundamental level to the scope of compositional descriptions. At the same time, compositionally has been proposed as a fundamental principle for the development of physical theories. This workshop will focus on the common structures and methods centered on compositionality that run through all these areas.

So, some physics and quantum computation will get into the mix!

A lot of people working on categories and computation will be at this workshop. Here’s what I know about the talks so far. If you click on the talk titles you’ll get abstracts, at least for most of them.

The program

 

Monday, December 5th, 2016
9 – 9:20 am
Coffee and Check-In
9:20 – 9:30 am
Opening Remarks
9:30 – 10:30 am
10:30 – 11 am
Break
11 – 11:35 am
11:40 am – 12:15 pm
12:20 – 2 pm
Lunch
2 – 2:35 pm
2:40 – 3:15 pm
3:30 – 4 pm
Break
4 – 5 pm
Discussion
5 – 6 pm
Reception

 

Tuesday, December 6th, 2016
9 – 9:30 am
Coffee and Check-In
9:30 – 10:30 am
10:30 – 11 am
Break
11 – 11:35 am
11:40 am – 12 pm
12:05 – 12:25 pm
12:30 – 2 pm
Lunch
2 – 2:35 pm
2:40 – 3:15 pm
3:30 – 4 pm
Break
4 – 5 pm
Discussion

 

Wednesday, December 7th, 2016
9 – 9:30 am
Coffee and Check-In
9:30 – 10:30 am
10:30 – 11 am
Break
11 – 11:20 am
11:25 – 11:45 am
11:50 am – 12:25 pm
12:30 – 2 pm
Lunch

 

Thursday, December 8th, 2016
9 – 9:30 am
Coffee and Check-In
9:30 – 10:05 am
10:10 – 10:30 am
10:35 – 11 am
Break
11 – 11:20 am
11 am – 11:45 am
11 am – 12:10 pm
12 pm – 2 pm
Lunch
2 – 2:35 pm
2:40 – 3:15 pm
3 pm – 3:50 pm
Break
3:50 – 4:25 pm
4:30 – 4:50 pm

 

Friday, December 9th, 2016
9:30 – 10:05 am
10 am – 10:45 am
10:50 – 11:20 am
Break
11:20 – 11:55 am
12 – 12:35 pm
12:40 – 2 pm
Lunch
2 – 3 pm
Discussion
3 – 3:40 pm

6 Responses to Compositionality Workshop

  1. This looks incredibly exciting! I am a novice and so much new material leaves me wondering as to how or even if I might ever be able contribute something useful. Nonetheless I see how my computational and topological interests lay in compositionality, and I am very excited by what I’m learning here. Perhaps coincidentally and unrelated, yesterday, random abstract work arrived at the unsolved Non-Existent Complex Six Sphere in a paper dedicated to S.S.Chern, Jim Simons and Nigel Hitchin written by Micheal Atiyah. The connections are fuzzy, I lack some language though I appreciate an ability to array small pieces into complex structures as a logical structure of computation and it appears to me to add high dimensional modularities to “establishing systematic relationships between compositional descriptions complexity.” https://arxiv.org/abs/1610.09366

  2. Doesn’t happen often that I’m sad about dropping out of academia and thus missing a conference or workshop. But this time I am sad. It’s totally aligned with my interests. And many acquaintances attend. David Pym was my boss and collaborator. And Gordon Plotkin once helped me with a decisive grant. Peter Selinger semi-scooped me on “continuations”. Ah well.

    • John Baez says:

      With luck some of the lectures will be recorded, or at least slides will be available. I’m sorry you’re not active in this scene, as I’m trying to get up to speed on a lot of the computer science aspects. But you can at least listen in and say something now and then.

  3. Here are the slides of my talk at the workshop on compositionality at the Simons Institute for the Theory of Computing next week:

    • John Baez, Compositionality in network theory, 6 December 2016.

    Abstract. To describe systems composed of interacting parts, scientists and engineers draw diagrams of networks: flow charts, Petri nets, electrical circuit diagrams, signal-flow graphs, chemical reaction networks, Feynman diagrams and the like. In principle all these different diagrams fit into a common framework: the mathematics of symmetric monoidal categories. This has been known for some time. However, the details are more challenging, and ultimately more rewarding, than this basic insight. Two complementary approaches are presentations of symmetric monoidal categories using generators and relations (which are more algebraic in flavor) and decorated cospan categories (which are more geometrical). In this talk we focus on the latter.

  4. John Baez says:

    Live streaming video of the whole workshop is here:

    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCW1C2xOfXsIzPgjXyuhkw9g

    and you can also see recorded talks.

    The conference schedule has changed a bit from that shown on my blog article; the revised version is here.

  5. Bill Lawvere figured out a way to talk about syntax versus semantics that even mathematicians—well, even category theorists—could understand. It’s called ‘functorial semantics’. But physicists may not enjoy this idea unless they see it at work in physics. In physics, too, the distinction is important. But it takes a while to understand. I hope Prakash Panangaden’s talk at the start of the Simons Institute workshop on compositionality is helpful:

You can use Markdown or HTML in your comments. You can also use LaTeX, like this: $latex E = m c^2 $. The word 'latex' comes right after the first dollar sign, with a space after it.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s