The Weighted Graph Monad
This document is a monad tutorial/cry for help. It first goes over monads in general, as far as I can say I understand them. Then it introduces a "novel" monad which I haven't seen described elsewhere on the internet. I'm certain that this "weighted graph monad" is not my invention, because, as I understand it, any data structure can be associated with any number of monads. I think I understand monads well enough at this point that this document will be useful to people who come from a lisp background as far as getting a deeper understanding of some of the things about them. If that is you, you can focus on the first section.
N.B.: Lispers who are interested in monads should read Drew Crampsie's write up on his SMUG library located here and Jim Duey's amazingly excellent monad tutorial for Clojure, which should never the less be useful to a generalized lisper. Although mostly directed at OCaml, I also found Chris Barker and Jim Pryor's course notes extremely enlightening. They can apparently be found here, though the URL implies this might be a link which becomes stale.
The second section is aimed at people who understand monads better than I do. In it, I describe the weighted graph monad as I have implemented it. Although it seems like a reasonable way to do things, its not clear that this is the most "monady" way of implementing such a monad. People seeking a better understanding of monads are, of course, welcome to read the second part. I think even if it is missing some grace and elegance, it is probably useful to see a monad built up from nothing, as it were. However, bearing the above qualifications in mind, the links above will prove much more useful to you than this document. Comments about the weighted graph monad or the tutorial can be directed to vincent dot toups at gmail's domain. I'd be really delighted if someone more knowledgable could shed light on the graph monad.
A monad is defined by at least two functions. Bind takes values out of a monadic value, and applies a function to those values. We don't worry too much about types in emacs lisp, but its useful to consider them here, because bind doesn't just apply ANY function to the value inside the monad, and it can't return just any old type. Bind takes a monadic value and a function which accepts a value of the kind stored in the monad and which returns a monadic value again.
The other function which defines a monad is the monadic Return function. This is a function which takese a value of the kind stored in the monad and returns the simplest monadic value possible that retains the input value. Return is almost the simplest possible function which can be passed to Bind - it takese a "naked" value, and returns a simple monadic value, just like any monadic function must.
Some monads define a value called the Monadic Zero, which is sort of the simplest possible monadic value for a given monad. It is called a zero by analogy to multiplication because binding any function to the monadic zero returns the monadic zero. So another simple function which we could pass to bind takes a value, ignores it, and returns the monadic zero.
People always bring up the sequence monad here, and although it is a clear and simple example of a monad, I don't recall it being particularly enlightening. But lets go through it anyway. In the sequence monad, Sequences are the monadic values, and the monadic functions are those functions which take an object of the kind stored in the sequence and return a new sequence. If we are dealing with lisp data, the sequence monadic values are lists of lisp data. And the sequence monadic functions are functions which take some kind of lisp data and return a list.
Values we can stick "in" the monad:
23 "test" (list 1 2 3 4) 'x :z
(list 1 2 3 4) (list :x (list 1 2 3 4) "test") (list 'x 'y 'z)
(lambda (x) nil) ; nil is the smallest list (lambda (x) (list x x)) (lambda (x) (list x (+ x 1) (- x 1))) (lambda (x) (list 1 2 3 4 5))
The bind operation for the sequence monad is simple.
(defun seq-bind (v f) (let ((monadic-values (mapcar f v))) (apply #'append monadic-values)))
We know we can map f over v because v is a sequence. We know we can apply append to the results because f is a monadic function which always returns lists. If we misbehave, and pass an f that doesn't return lists in, we'll get a run time error. Similarly if v isn't a list.
N.B. - seq-bind is often called
mapcat for "map and concatenate".
The sequence return function is even simpler. It is just the
List is obviously a monadic function - it takes an item
and returns a list.
Using these functions we can write a function which takes a list, and returns a list where every element is repeated twice.
(defun dup (x) (list x x)) ; return a list made of two x's (defun dup-elements (lst) (seq-bind lst #'dup))
(dup-elements '(1 2 3 4)) -> (1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4)
Note that dup-elements is not a monadic function. It takes a list as input. You can think of the monad as being an interface layer between things and lists, a contract that guarantees that for any monadic function it will do something right with the output. Given that dup-elements is not a monadic function, what do we do if we want to use the sequence monad to dup the elements twice? One possibility is:
(defun double-dup (lst) (seq-bind (seq-bind lst #'dup) #'dup)) (double-dup '(1 2 3) -> '(1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3)
It is now time to take two birds with one stone. We'd like to be able
to succinctly chain monadic functions, sometimes without even giving
them explicit names. We do this with
do notation in Haskell. In
Lisp we can roll our own macro,
domonad (based on the Clojure monad
(require 'monads) (defun double-dup (lst) (domonad monad-seq [x lst y (dup x) z (dup y)] z))
This body of double-dup is equivalent to the expression:
(seq-bind lst (lambda (x) (seq-bind (dup x) (lambda (y) (seq-bind (dup y) (lambda (z) (progn (seq-return z))))))))
Each expression is chained into the monad such that the results of the
previous expressions are monadically bound to the variables in the do
form. A do form is a lot like the
let* form in lisp. In fact,
let* is just
domonad identity-monad. This isn't a coincidence.
You can implement
let* as a nest of function applications.
(let* ((x 1) (y (+ x 1))) (+ x y))
Is the same as
(funcall (lambda (x) (funcall (lambda (y) (+ x y)) (+ x 1))) 1)
A monad is just a controlled way of extending the notion of function
composition and a
do form is just a
let* form with those modified
function composition semantics.
We can do really neat things with monads. The sequence monad lets you build up lists a lot like a list comprehension in a language like python. Want the list of all possible combinations of three sets of symbols?
(domonad monad-seq [s1 '(a b c) s2 '(d e f) s3 '(g h i)] (list s1 s2 s2)) -> ((a d d) (a d d) (a d d) (a e e) (a e e) (a e e) (a f f) (a f f) (a f f) (b d d) (b d d) (b d d) (b e e) (b e e) (b e e) (b f f) (b f f) (b f f) (c d d) (c d d) (c d d) (c e e) (c e e) (c e e) (c f f) (c f f) (c f f) ...)
To the Graph Monad
I have it on good authority that one can think of many data structures as having an accompaning monad. Can we try to "discover" the monad associated with other data structures? Heedless of utility or an efficient use of my time, I set out to do just that. The data structure I considered was the symmetric weighted graph. This is a data structure consisting of a set of nodes and a set of edges, which connect nodes. Furthermore, we enforce symmetry, so that the edge '(a b) between nodes a and b is considered the same as the edge '(b a). We are going to represent this structure using the inefficient but easy to grasp association-list. Here is some code to create an empty weighted graph:
(defun* empty-weighted-graph (&key (symmetric t) (pred #'equal)) "Create an empty weighted-graph. Not usually called directly." (alist>> :nodes nil ; the nodes :connections nil ; the edges :symmetric symmetric ; whether edges should be symmetric or go both ways. :pred pred))
Each entry in the alist is stored as a (key val) pair. We'll use this skeleton to store our alist. We can add a node thusly:
(defun wg-add-node (wg node) "Add a NODE to a weighted graph WG." (alist-add-to-set wg :nodes node (alist wg :pred)))
And a connection as so:
(defun wg-add-connection (wg node1 node2 connection) "Add a connection to the weighted graph WG between NODE1 and NODE2 of weight CONNECTION. If the nodes are not already in the graph, add them before creating the connection. If the connection is already in the graph, CONNECTION is added to the connection strength. When the graph is symmetric, the connection between NODE1 and NODE2 is the same as that between NODE2 and NODE1. " (let* ((wg (alist-add-to-set wg :nodes node1)) (wg (alist-add-to-set wg :nodes node2)) (c-nodes (if (alist wg :symmetric) (wg-pair-to-canonical-order wg node1 node2) (list node1 node2))) (connections (alist wg :connections))) (if connection (alist>> wg :connections (pred-alist-conjugate wg :pred) connections c-nodes (lambda (old) (+ old connection)) 0)) (alist>> wg :connections (pred-dissoc (alist wg :pred) connections c-nodes)))))
That is a lot of static just to do something simple: If either node1 or node2 isn't in the graph (based on the predicate field of the graph), they are added to a set stored in :nodes. If the edge is not in the graph, it is added. If the edge is in the graph, it is added to the value passed in, unless nil is passed in. In the case of a NIL connection, the connection is removed from the set. The connections are stored as an a-list of node-pair value pairs. The node pairs are sorted into "canonical order" before storage, to ensure graph symmetry. Canonical order is just the order the nodes were added to the graph so that graph nodes for which there is no standard ordering can be ordered in a predictable way.
We need just one more function. If you are paying attention, bells should go off when we discuss it:
(defun wg-combine (wg1 wg2) "Combine weighted graphcs WG1 and WG2 using the symmetry semantics of WG1 by adding the connections in WG2 to WG1. This is half of the weighted graph BIND operation." (let* ((wg1 (reduce (lambda (wg conn) (wg-add-connection wg (car (car conn)) (cadr (car conn)) (cadr conn))) (alist wg2 :connections) :initial-value (wg-combine-nodes wg1 wg2)))) wg1))
This function uses
wg-add-connection to add all the connections
wg-add-connection adds connection
strengths together, the result is a graph reflecting the connectivity
of both graphs.
The bell that should have gone off in your head is that we've very
nearly defined our
return operations. If our nodes hold
our monadic values, then monadic functions are functions which take
nodes and return a weighted graph. One way of defining bind is then:
(defun weighted-graph-bind (v f) "Bind the value V, a weighted graph, with the function F, which should take a node value and return a weighted graph to be combined with V." (reduce (lambda (wg node) (wg-combine wg (funcall f node))) (alist v :nodes) :initial-value (alist>> v :symmetry t)))
This is pretty straightfoward.
Bind takes a weighted graph and a
function which takes nodes and returns a weighted graph, applies
to all the nodes in the input graph and then mergers them together,
starting with the input graph.
Since this monad will let us build up graphs out of smaller graphs, we
should define some convenient functions to create small graphs. These
will appear in the expression forms of
domonad and give our
operations a pleasantly domain-specific-language feel.
(defun nodes (&rest nodes) "Create a weighted graph with only NODES." (wg :nodes nodes)) (defun node (node) "Create a graph with a single node." (wg :nodes (list node))) (defun edges (&rest edges) "Create a weighted graph with EDGES. Nodes are added as needed, repeated edges are combined. EDGES should be a flat list of triples of the form NODE1 NODE2 STREN." (wg :connections edges)) (defun edge (from to stren) "Create a graph with a single edge FROM to TO with strength STREN." (wg :connections (list from to stren))) (defun unedge (from to) "Specify a weighted graph which explicitely doesn't contain an edge FROM TO." (alist>> (empty-weighted-graph) :connections `(((,from ,to) nil))))
The only weird one here is
unedge which builds a graph with an
Wg-combine has a bit of logic built in which
removes an edge in the result graph when the merged graph contains an
nil edge. This will let us delete as well as modify
edges in our graphs from within a monadic function. Note finally that
node is the monad's
It takes a value and wraps it in the monad. Using the eclectic monad library I've written for emacs lisp, we define a new monad:
(defvar weighted-graph-monad (tbl! :m-bind #'weighted-graph-bind :m-return #'wg-return) "The weighted graph monad.")
We can now invoke the
domonad form with
Let's do a simple example. Lets build a graph which has the three
(a b c) and edges between every member and every other except
when the members are identical.
(cl-prettyprint (domonad weighted-graph-monad [node1 (nodes 'a 'b 'c) node2 (nodes 'a 'b 'c) final-graph (if (equal node1 node2) (empty-weighted-graph) (edge node1 node2 1))] final-graph)) ((:connections (((c a) 1) ((b c) 1) ((a b) 1))) (:nodes (a b c)) (:symmetric t) (:pred equal))
A more complex example follows. In it we create a set of constructors
and predicates to create and identify
women. We then use
the graph monad to simulate a sexual contact network men and women,
using different probabilities of sexual encounter depending on whether
relations are homo or hetero-sexual. It occurs to me that this is a
kind of weird example.
(labels ((man (name) (list (intern "man") name)) (woman (name) (list (intern "woman") name)) (man? (thing) (and (listp thing) (eq (car thing) (intern "man")))) (two-men? (thing1 thing2) (and (man? thing1) (man? thing2))) (two-women? (thing1 thing2) (and (woman? thing1) (woman? thing2))) (woman? (thing) (and (listp thing) (eq (car thing) (intern "woman"))))) (let ((hetero-prob .3) ;set the probability of heterosexual encounters (homo-prob .1) ;set the probability of homosexual encounters (empty-graph (weighted-graph nil)) ; we will be using the empty graph a lot ; this is m-zero anyway. (population ; describe the population as a list of nodes, we will fill in ; connections later. (weighted-graph (list (man :bob) (man :ted) (man :leo) (man :theo) (man :jon) (man :herbert) (woman :sally) (woman :alice) (woman :jane) (woman :elizabeth) (woman :karen))))) (domonad weighted-graph-monad [person1 population person2 population connected-pop (cond ((equal person1 person2) empty-graph) ; lol, people don't have sex with themselves ((or (two-men? person1 person2) (two-women? person1 person2)) (if ($ (random* 1.0) < homo-prob) ; ie, there is a homosexual encounter (wg-connect person1 person2 1) empty-graph)) (t (if ($ (random* 1.0) < hetero-prob) ; ie, there is a heterosexual encounter (wg-connect person1 person2 1) empty-graph)))] ; return the final connected population after one round of activity. connected-pop)))
(require 'weighted-graph-monad) you should be able to run
this and get a graph out that reflects one possible pass through a
swingers party in the 70's.