Thank you CEL team(...) for daily discussion and also great foundation such as predicate from PG.
Problems to solve
It's not really efficient to discribe new predicate everytime it is created. Researchers need a very high context background to understand the behavior of deprecation logic in the discussion for example at plasma.build. We should define the notation for predicates so that everyone can share a new predicate desdin quickly without any misinterpretation.
Secondly, it's generally important to look for what atomic predicate is. In this theory, We can convert from complex predicate to multiple simple predicates. We can build more complex predicate easily, and also break these down to more general predicates.
How does it work in detail
Dispute scheme and deprecation logic
The dispute scheme is to prove the validity of state.
The deprecation logic is to prove deprecation of state.
sg.icon state isn't well formalized yet
sg.icon "disputation" is grammatically correct naming.
dispute(deprecationA(state) and deprecationB(state)) = dispute(deprecationA(state)) or dispute(deprecationB(state))
dispute(deprecationA(state) or deprecationB(state)) = dispute(deprecationA(state)) and dispute(deprecationB(state))
This formula defamation stands for that "the transfer with fee predicate" can be split into fee predicate and ownership predicate.
sg.icon defamation? 誹謗中傷?
sg.icon "predicate" below is the "disputation scheme" category