Thanks Benoit, Great points. Is there a metamath-exe way to compute the axioms dependency so that I can run that analysis?
Concerning keeping an OLD version, happy to do so. I’ll update the PR accordingly unless I hear otherwise. I’ll prepare a summary of our approach to share with the community as well. Best, -stan On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 5:54 PM Benoit <[email protected]> wrote: > That's very interesting and promising ! > > Did you make sure that no new axiom dependencies were introduced in the > proofs ? Is it possible to keep the older proofs as "xxxOLD" with the > comment "Old proof of ~ xxx . Obsolete as of 26-Mar-2020. " and both > discouragement tags ? This would ease comparisons and might give some > insight on the kind of shortening introduced. > > Is it possible to have some details on the model that you used ? > > Benoît > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Metamath" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/metamath/833aa5a4-23f0-4a30-bbaf-b49acaa3a510%40googlegroups.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/metamath/833aa5a4-23f0-4a30-bbaf-b49acaa3a510%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Metamath" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/metamath/CACZd_0xGsge-GVOUnn06V%3DEKKmtZ25by%3DhCxRkjBZeZ1FWm__g%40mail.gmail.com.
