fix: clarifications and touch-ups #4
Conversation
|
Warning Rate limit exceeded@flyingrobots has exceeded the limit for the number of commits or files that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 11 minutes and 44 seconds before requesting another review. ⌛ How to resolve this issue?After the wait time has elapsed, a review can be triggered using the We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit. 🚦 How do rate limits work?CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization. Our paid plans have higher rate limits than the trial, open-source and free plans. In all cases, we re-allow further reviews after a brief timeout. Please see our FAQ for further information. 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
Note Other AI code review bot(s) detectedCodeRabbit has detected other AI code review bot(s) in this pull request and will avoid duplicating their findings in the review comments. This may lead to a less comprehensive review. Summary by CodeRabbit
✏️ Tip: You can customize this high-level summary in your review settings. WalkthroughStandardized BibTeX author formatting; clarified microstep/derivation-graph finiteness and tick monotonicity; tightened reconstruction/determinism wording; expanded RMG morphism to include a discrete Atom category and recursive morphism components; added LaTeX macros Changes
Sequence Diagram(s)(omitted — changes are documentation/notation edits and do not alter runtime control flow) Estimated code review effort🎯 3 (Moderate) | ⏱️ ~20 minutes
Possibly related PRs
Pre-merge checks and finishing touches✅ Passed checks (3 passed)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 6
Caution
Some comments are outside the diff and can’t be posted inline due to platform limitations.
⚠️ Outside diff range comments (1)
aion-holography/references.bib (1)
1-90: CRITICAL: Incomplete author formatting standardization.You've updated five entries to use the standard BibTeX "Last, First" format, which is correct and commendable. However, the standardization is incomplete:
Still using "First Last" format:
- Line 52:
author = {James Ross}should beauthor = {Ross, James}- Line 59:
author = {James Ross}should beauthor = {Ross, James}- Line 84:
author = {James Ross}should beauthor = {Ross, James}Already correct:
- Line 66:
author = {Lack, Steven and Soboci{\'n}ski, Pawel}✓- Line 77: Multi-author entry already using correct format ✓
While BibTeX can often handle "First Last" for single authors, the explicit "Last, First" format is the standard and ensures:
- Consistency across all entries
- Correct behavior with all bibliography styles
- Maintainability when editing author names
Since you've committed to this standardization for five entries, you must complete it for all remaining entries for true consistency.
Apply this diff to complete the standardization:
@misc{RossRMG2025, - author = {James Ross}, + author = {Ross, James}, title = {Recursive Metagraphs: DPOI Semantics, Confluence, Hypergraph Embedding, and Rulial Distance}, year = {2025}, note = {Technical report} } @misc{RossAIONCalculus2025, - author = {James Ross}, + author = {Ross, James}, title = {The {AION} Calculus}, year = {2025}, note = {Working note} } @misc{ross_universal_charter_v1, - author = {James Ross}, + author = {Ross, James}, title = {Universal Charter: A Living Covenant for All Forms of Being Across Substrate, Time, and Dimension}, howpublished = {\url{https://github.com/universalcharter/universal-charter}}, note = {Version 1.0.0 (First Flame), commit 849d9ca}, year = {2025}, month = {June}, }</invoke_comment_end -->
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: ASSERTIVE
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (4)
-
aion-holography/references.bib(5 hunks) -
aion-holography/sections/holography.tex(2 hunks) -
aion-holography/sections/multiway_ruliad.tex(1 hunks) -
aion-holography/sections/rmg.tex(3 hunks)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (1)
- GitHub Check: build-holography
🔇 Additional comments (1)
aion-holography/sections/rmg.tex (1)
174-175: LGTM: Enhanced notation description.The expansion from "history category" to "history category on a universe
$U$ of RMG states" significantly improves clarity. This makes explicit that$U$ is a collection of RMG states and that$\Hist(U,R)$ is constructed from this collection.This pairs well with the line 160 notation update, though both rely on the reader understanding what constitutes a "universe" (see comment on line 160).
</invoke_comment_end -->
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 3
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: ASSERTIVE
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (5)
-
aion-holography/macros.tex(1 hunks) -
aion-holography/references.bib(7 hunks) -
aion-holography/sections/discussion.tex(1 hunks) -
aion-holography/sections/holography.tex(2 hunks) -
aion-holography/sections/rmg.tex(3 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (4)
aion-holography/references.bib (1)
2-59: Bibliography author-name normalization looks consistent and correctThe switch to
Surname, Givenfor all affected entries (including the “van” particle invan Oostrom, Vincent) is stylistically consistent and plays nicely with BibTeX name parsing. No technical or formatting issues from these edits.Also applies to: 83-89
aion-holography/macros.tex (1)
9-10: Category-theory macros are idiomatic; just ensure package/macro hygieneThe
\Homand\iddefinitions are standard and align with their usage inrmg.tex. No issues with the definitions themselves.Two small hygiene checks:
- Make sure a package providing
\DeclareMathOperator(typicallyamsmath) is loaded in the preamble.- Confirm there isn’t an existing
\idmacro from another package/class that you’re unintentionally overriding.aion-holography/sections/holography.tex (1)
178-183: Determinism + tick-level confluence wording is now crispSplitting the sentence and introducing “Furthermore” makes the logic much clearer:
- Determinism gives uniqueness of each
$S_{i+1}$ (up to isomorphism).- Tick-level confluence guarantees any compatible interleaving of concurrent matches leads to an isomorphic successor.
This aligns cleanly with the earlier theorem statement and the reconstruction definition.
aion-holography/sections/rmg.tex (1)
163-181: “RMG universe” and notation summary are now clear and internally consistentThe updated notation row and the follow-up sentences finally pin down the universe story:
$\mathcal{U} = (G;\alpha,\beta)$ is explicitly a single RMG state with$\mathcal{U} \in U$ .- An “RMG universe
$U$ ” is clearly described as a collection of RMG states related by rewriting.- The note that
$U$ always denotes such a universe, and that$\Hist(U,R)$ is the history category on a universe$U$ of RMG states, ties back cleanly to later sections.This resolves the earlier ambiguity about what
$U$ and$\mathcal{U}$ denote without introducing any new notational weirdness.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: ASSERTIVE
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
-
aion-holography/sections/discussion.tex(1 hunks) -
aion-holography/sections/holography.tex(2 hunks) -
aion-holography/sections/rmg.tex(3 hunks)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (1)
- GitHub Check: build-holography
🔇 Additional comments (5)
aion-holography/sections/discussion.tex (1)
73-75: Chronos–Kairos–Aion triad phrasing is finally clean.The added “and” makes the triad grammatically correct while keeping the comma-separated style; no further nits here.
aion-holography/sections/holography.tex (2)
30-47: Derivation-graph finiteness/acyclicity argument is now mathematically airtight.You’ve finally made all the implicit steps explicit: each microstep is
$S_j \Rewrite^{\mu_j} S_{j+1}$ , edges go strictly from$S_j$ to$S_{j+1}$ , the union of$n!+!1$ finite states bounds node count, and strictly increasing tick indices kill cycles. The immutability story now lines up perfectly with the provenance-edge direction.
178-184: Reconstruction determinism + confluence phrasing is precise and no longer syntactically awkward.Splitting the sentence so that determinism gives uniqueness of
$S_{i+1}$ and confluence is introduced with “Furthermore” removes the bogus “while” contrast and cleanly separates the two guarantees; the math matches the concurrency theorem assumptions.aion-holography/sections/rmg.tex (2)
59-72: RMG morphism base-case + discrete category are now categorically respectable.This fixes the earlier mess:
$\mathbf{P}$ is explicitly discrete, the atomic hom-sets are defined in$\RMG$ with$\Hom_{\RMG}$ and$\id_{\mathrm{Atom}(p)}$ , and Atom:$\mathbf{P}\to\RMG$ being faithful is now an immediate consequence. The construction is mathematically clean and LaTeX-safe.
164-182: “RMG universe” notation is now defined and consistent with$\Hist(U,R)$ .The table row plus the follow-up sentence finally pin down
$U$ as “a collection of RMG states related by rewriting” with$\mathcal{U}\in U$ , and the revised “history category on a universe$U$ of RMG states” description for$\Hist(U,R)$ is aligned with that. This removes the prior ambiguity between gothic$\mathcal{U}$ and script$U$ without introducing new notation leaks.
Adds some clarifications and fixes to the paper based on previous CodeRabbit review.