Algorithmic Information Theory: Some Recollections
Open accessAbstract
Presents a history of the evolution of the author's ideas on program-size complexity and its applications to metamathematics over the course of more than four decades. Includes suggestions for further work.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The vast majority of possible sequences of 1s and 0s that are 48 digits long are incompressible.
“The vast majority of such sequences are incompressible (see, for example, Chaitin (1966; 1969), and Chaitin (2007) for an accessible overview).”
From The nomological argument for the existence of God (2022) · cites this paper as Chaitin (2007)
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
Cited by 6
- Authors
- Chaitin, G.
- Affiliations
- IBM Research - Thomas J. Watson Research Center (US)
- Corresponding author
- Chaitin, Gregory
- Venue
- Randomness and Complexity, From Leibniz to Chaitin
- Publisher
- WORLD SCIENTIFIC
- Published
- 2007-10
- Pages
- 423-441
- OpenAlex
- W1633847656
- Cited by
- 6
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- WORLD SCIENTIFIC eBooks (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Computability, Logic, AI Algorithms
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Algorithms and Data Compression
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › semigroups and automata theory
- Keywords
- algorithmic information theory, Kolmogorov complexity, memoirs, history of computer science
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
