update links

]]>More material about functors, adding a section on natural language processing.

]]>Adding a sentence to explain the name. Adding the definition of identity, tensor and composition of diagrams. Moving the proof assistant list to context.

]]>To answer your question about what people actually do with it, at first the story was that we wanted to implement monoidal functors from pregoup grammars (i.e. free rigid monoidal category) into the category of matrices, a.k.a. Distributional Compositional Categorical models. We thought that the Python machinery to manipulate string diagrams was useful enough to implement it for monoidal categories in general, rather writing ad hoc code for our particular use case.

Later we implemented functors into quantum circuits, and started running natural language processing experiments with today's available quantum computers. Now some independent projects are starting to pop up where people use the package to do things like matrix algebra over exotic number fields or generative modelling with probabilistic programs as diagrams (https://arxiv.org/abs/2011.11063). ]]>

On a simpler note, maybe in the Idea-section would be the place to explain the name “DisCoPy”. (I gather “Py” is for “Python”, but I don’t know what “DisCo” is for.)

[edit: oh, I see it from the project home page now, it’s for “Distributional Compositional Ptython”. But it may still be good to explain what that is supposed to mean, in turn.]

And after reading the page I am still wondering what people actually do with the program. Do you prove theorems? Do you generate verified code for application elsewhere?

]]>Looks good!

I have added just a few more hyperlinks, such as for *free monoid* and for *interchanger*.

Removing broken links for authors. Moving the GitHub link to the references. Adding some more hyperlinks in the intro (string diagram and monoidal functor).

]]>Thanks. I have hyperlinked the key technical term “monoidal categories”. Also “Python”, for good measure.

I think your pointer to the GitHub page in the introduction should be included in the list of references.

I see that you have plenty of broken links on author names now. I suggest to only add square brackets on author names if their entry already exists or if you are about to create it right away. Because otherwise nobody will do it, generally, and the link will stay broken and look ugly forever.

]]>Adding the definition of diagram.

]]>Creating stub. Adding two references.

]]>