Two-dimensional transducers

Fosco Loregian

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 19 references

Two-dimensional transducers

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-04 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read This paper defines a bicategory 2TDX whose 1-cells are 2-transducers, pairs of a state category and an output-presheaf-enriched profunctor, and shows classical transducers arise as a Boolean discrete special case.

desk verdict The paper builds a genuinely new bicategory of transducers, but a displayed formula in Remark 2.11 contradicts its own strong-monoidal definition, and that needs fixing before the construction is sound. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.06769 v2 pith:VHRRFZ3B submitted 2025-09-08 math.CT

Fosco Loregian This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.CT MSC 18N1068Q45

keywords transducersbicategoriesprofunctorsdoublecategoriesgradedmonadscategorificationautomatatheorypromonads

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper's central claim is that transducers—state machines that consume input words and produce output words—can be organised into a bicategory, called 2TDX, whose 1-cells are '2-transducers'. A 2-transducer is a state category Q together with a strong monoidal functor t from input words A* to endoprofunctors on Q enriched over presheaves on output words B*; unwinding the enrichment, this is just a profunctor t: A × Q^op × Q × (B*)^op → Set. Composition is defined by a coend formula, and the state category of a composite is the product of the two state categories. If the construction is right, classical transducers become a sub-bicategory when alphabets are discrete and the base is Boolean, profunctors sit inside 2TDX as the trivial-state case, and every hom-category is cocomplete with right extensions and liftings. The payoff is a precise compositional and monoidal framework for translation in series and parallel, which the classical theory of transducers mentions but never formalises.

What carries the argument

The central object is the 2-transducer (Q,t): a state category Q and a strong monoidal functor t: A* → K⟨B⟩-Prof(Q,Q), equivalently a single profunctor t: A × Q^op × Q × (B*)^op → Set. Composition of (P,s): A → B and (Q,t): B → C is given by the coend formula (t∘s)(a;(p,q),(p',q'))[c] = ∫^{b∈B*} s(a,q,q')[b] × t(b;p,p')[c], with state category Q × P. Strong monoidality in A* is what makes t determined by its 'structure constants' t_a for single letters, exactly as a classical transducer is determined by its transition matrices.

What would settle it

Take three composable 2-transducers with nontrivial state categories, e.g. A=B=C={a,b} and two-element state sets, and write out both routes through the associator using formula (2.14); if the two composite 2-cells disagree at any input, the pentagon identity fails and 2TDX is not a bicategory.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is that a transducer should be read as a graded-and-indexed profunctor: the data (Q,t) with t: A* → K⟨B⟩-Prof(Q,Q), where K⟨B⟩ = Set^{(B*)^op}, is a 1-cell A ⇝ B in a bicategory 2TDX. The paper shows that this definition not only specialises to the classical one—when A, B, Q are discrete and the presheaf category is replaced by the Boolean quantale—but supports a full bicategorical calculus: composition by coends, tensor product by Day convolution and categorical product, monads as graded promonads over the state category, and a double-categorical presentation DTDX in which products, coproducts, reflexive coequalizers, cotabulators, companions and conj

Load-bearing premise

The construction is a bicategory only if the associator and unitor coherences—currently handed to 'rote computation'—satisfy Mac Lane's pentagon and unit axioms in full.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Classical finite Boolean transducers form a sub-bicategory TDX of 2TDX, making composition of 1-transducers in series an explicit algebraic structure.
Profunctors embed into 2TDX by taking the terminal state category, so every dictionary-style translation profunctor is a 2-transducer with trivial states.
Every hom-category 2TDX(A,B) has all small colimits, and pre- and post-composition preserve them; hence right extensions and right liftings exist throughout.
A monad in DTDX is exactly a promonad on A* graded over Q^op × Q, with the state category Q acquiring a monoidal structure; adjunctions in 2TDX force the state categories to be terminal.
The double category DTDX has coproducts, products, reflexive coequalizers, and cotabulators, but not all tabulators; tight arrows have companions and conjoints inherited from profunctors.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

One extension the author leaves implicit: the coend composition law could be implemented as a compositional semantics for weighted transducers; a concrete test would be whether formula (2.14) reproduces the standard composition of weighted finite-state transducers.
The graded-coKleisli characterisation suggests a connection to graded type theory; one could ask whether 2TDX gives a model of graded stateful computation whose objects are alphabets and whose morphisms are translations.
The speculative differential-equation analogy predicts invariants of transducers from spectral curves; a testable version would be to prove that the characteristic polynomial of the structure constants is unchanged under series composition, which the paper does not address.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Colleague,

The short version: this is a real contribution to categorical automata theory. The bicategory 2TDX and its double-category sibling DTDX are new objects, and the paper does a good job connecting them to Paré's Mealy morphisms, Walters' circuits, and Guitart's machines. The central idea—seeing a transducer as a profunctor t: A × Q^op × Q × (B*)^op → Set and extending to A* as a strong monoidal functor—is coherent and worth taking seriously. But there is a concrete problem in the paper as written, and it is load-bearing.

In Remark 2.11, Eq. (2.6), the paper unpacks strong monoidality as a pointwise product over the same output word b in every factor. That is not Day convolution, which is what the monoidal structure on K⟨B⟩-Prof requires. With Day convolution, the output of a word of length n should be a coend over output words b1,...,bn with an extra factor B*(b, b1++...++bn). The displayed formula gives the wrong answer for even a two-letter transducer with singleton output alphabet: t(a1a2) would be nonempty at output length 1 and empty at length 2, whereas the classical matrix product (Eq. 1.5) and the paper's own Definition 2.6 require output length 2. This is not a mere matter of skipped coherence proofs; the formula as written is inconsistent with the definition it is supposed to unpack.

The good news is that the intended construction is clear: the paper's informal discussion and the composition law in Definition-Construction 2.13 use the correct concatenation semantics, so this looks like a typo that can be fixed by replacing the pointwise product with the Day convolution coend. But because strong monoidality is the foundational property on which 2TDX is built, the correction cannot be left as an exercise. The author also says "rote computation yields all the needed coherences"—that is fine for a sketch, but given the above error, the coherence verification should be written out or at least clearly anchored to the corrected formula.

The other soft spots the reader identified—sketched coequalizer construction (Construction 3.4), size issues waved away, and some conjectural parts in Section 5—are real but minor by comparison. The paper is clearly written for category theorists, not automata theorists; the latter would need more explicit translation into their language.

Verdict: worth sending to referees, but only after the author fixes Eq. (2.6) and supplies the missing coherence details. As it stands, the central claim is plausible and most likely correct, but the current text doesn't yet support it.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a categorification of transducers. A 2-transducer is defined as a pair (Q,t) consisting of a state category Q and a strong monoidal functor t:A*→K⟨B⟩-Prof(Q,Q), equivalently unpacked as a profunctor t:A×Q^op×Q×(B*)^op→Set. The main claims are: such data form a bicategory 2TDX; 1-transducers are recovered in the discrete/Boolean case; 2TDX(A,B) admits several equivalent characterizations and is the loose bicategory of a double category DTDX; DTDX has (co)limits, companions and conjoints, and a monoidal structure on the decategorified TDX; monads and adjunctions in 2TDX have a concrete description; and 2TDX relates to Walters' circuits and Guitart's MAC. The paper is largely exploratory, with several constructions and proofs presented as sketches.

Significance. If the construction can be made fully rigorous, the paper would provide a genuinely new compositional framework for transducers, connecting automata theory with enriched profunctor theory, graded monads, and double categories. It is creative, draws on a wide literature, and offers several useful reformulations (Laurent–Yoneda extension, graded coKleisli presentation, circuit comparison). However, the central concrete unpacking of strong monoidality is incorrect as printed, and several load-bearing coherence and completeness arguments are only asserted. These issues must be repaired before the main claims can be accepted.

major comments (3)

[Remark 2.11, Eq. (2.6)] This formula is the paper's concrete unpacking of strong monoidality, but it uses the pointwise product at a fixed output b rather than Day convolution. Since K⟨B⟩ is monoidal under Day convolution, the correct expression must involve a coend over b1,...,bn and a factor B*(b,b1++...++bn); the displayed formula has no summation over b_i and no concatenation constraint. Concretely, for B={*} and each generating t_a equal to the representable at the one-letter word, (2.6) gives t(a1a2)(*) nonempty and t(a1a2)(**) empty, whereas the strong monoidal extension (and the classical matrix product, Eq. (1.5)) gives the opposite. Thus Eq. (2.6) does not define a strong monoidal functor, and taken literally it destroys the claim that 2TDX recovers classical transducers. Please correct the formula and re-check all uses that rely on this unpacking.
[Definition-Construction 2.13, coherence axioms] The pentagon and unit axioms for the bicategory 2TDX are asserted at the end of the construction with 'Rote computation yields all the needed coherences', without displaying the coherence diagrams or reducing them to standard coend identities. Because 2TDX is the central object and the preceding Remark 2.11 shows that a 'routine' coend manipulation can be wrong, this gap is load-bearing. Please provide a complete verification, or derive the bicategory structure from a general framework (e.g., from the double category DTDX and its tabulators/cotabulators) so that the coherences follow abstractly.
[Construction 3.4, coequalizers] The claimed cocompleteness of DTDX rests on this construction, but the key step—checking that C0 and C1 are the coequalizers displayed in (3.22)—is dismissed as 'a completely routine argument'. The construction uses coequalizers in Cat/{0→1}, siftedness, and the interaction of the free monoidal category functor with coequalizers, which is not generally preserved. In particular, the isomorphism (3.23) must be justified. Please expand this proof or replace it with a precise reference that covers the graded case.

minor comments (5)

[Abstract and §2] Definition 2.9 already defines t as a strong monoidal functor on A*, so the abstract's phrase 'Extending t to A* in a canonical way' is confusing. Clarify that t is determined by its restriction to generators and that the canonical extension is part of the strong monoidality.
[Remark 2.17(tc4)] The notation '(a,b)⊗(a',b') := (a++a', b++op b')' is ambiguous: in (B*)^op the monoidal product of b and b' is b' ++ b. Please state the Day convolution formula explicitly.
[Construction 3.2, Eq. (3.10)] The domain is informally written as 'A×Q^op×Q + C×P^op×P + (higher terms)'. This shorthand should be replaced by the actual coproduct decomposition, since it is not immediately clear how the higher terms are treated and what happens to the initial objects.
[Throughout] There are numerous typographical and OCR-style errors (e.g., 'transducert', 'quatransducers', 'bicat´egorie gradu´ee') and inconsistent bold/bbold notation for 2-categories vs double categories. A careful proofreading pass is needed.
[Theorem 3.11] The theorem is a main structural result, but its proof is mostly a sketch ('Packaging all together...'). Either expand the proof or clearly mark it as a sketch so the reader can calibrate the level of rigor.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No circular derivation: the bicategory 2TDX is constructed explicitly, and self-citations are background, not load-bearing.

full rationale

The central claim is the construction of a bicategory 2TDX whose 1-cells are pairs (Q,t) with t a strong monoidal functor A* → K⟨B⟩-Prof(Q,Q). The paper gives the data in Definition 2.9 and unpacks composition, identities, associators and unitors in Definition-Construction 2.13 with explicit coend formulas. There is no fitted parameter, no empirical input, and no quantity that is 'predicted' after being used to define the construction; the claimed recovery of classical transducers is obtained by specializing to discrete categories and Boolean enrichment (Remark 2.24), not by assuming that recovery. The author's earlier papers are cited for background notions (e.g. [LT23] for '2-rigon', [Lor25] for Mealy automata in double categories), but the bicategory structure of 2TDX is not imported from those citations; the associativity/unitality coherences are asserted to follow by 'Rote computation' (end of Definition-Construction 2.13). That is an omitted proof, not a circular step. I also note a genuine mathematical concern outside circularity: Eq. (2.6) unpacks the strong monoidal extension with a pointwise product t_{a1}(...)(b) × ... × t_{an}(...)(b), whereas strong monoidality into K⟨B⟩-Prof should use Day convolution in K⟨B⟩, i.e. a coend over decompositions b1++...++bn of the output word; as written this conflicts with both Definition 2.9 and the classical matrix product in (1.5). This is an internal inconsistency that may affect the coherence verification, but it is not a reduction of the conclusion to its own inputs. Accordingly the circularity score is 1 (minor self-citation, not load-bearing).

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 2 invented entities

The paper introduces a new bicategory 2TDX and a related double category DTDX. The construction relies on standard category theory (coends, Yoneda, free cocompletion) and on a domain assumption that transducers are best modeled as graded profunctors. There are no fitted parameters. The main mathematical risk is the unproven coherence axioms for the bicategory, which are asserted rather than fully derived.

assumptions (5)

standard math Coend calculus and the Yoneda lemma are valid in the relevant settings
Used throughout for composition, extensions, and the construction of right liftings and extensions.
standard math The free monoidal category A* and free cocompletion K<B> = Set^{(B*)^op} exist and have the stated universal properties
Fundamental to the definition of a 2-transducer as a strong monoidal functor from A* into K<B>-Prof(Q,Q).
domain assumption Transducers are faithfully modeled as profunctors t: A × Q^op × Q × (B*)^op -> Set
This is the central categorification, introduced in Definition-Construction 2.13; it is the premise that gives the paper its subject.
domain assumption The strong monoidal structure on t over A* is well-defined and determines t on all words
Needed to extend from generators in A to arbitrary words in A*, as stated in Definition 2.9.
domain assumption The composition of 2-transducers via coends and the Laurent-Yoneda extension is well-defined and associative up to isomorphism
This is the core compositional structure of 2TDX, defined in (2.14); the paper sketches the coend calculations but does not fully verify all coherence axioms.

invented entities (2)

Bicategory 2TDX
purpose: Categorify transducers as 1-cells in a bicategory
New mathematical structure introduced in this paper. No falsifiable predictions or external applications are provided beyond the internal theory.
Laurent-Yoneda extension
purpose: Extend a 2-transducer from A* to K<A> to define composition
New construction introduced in Remark 2.12; it is defined using standard left Kan extensions but is not connected to independent evidence.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Two-dimensional transducers." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/VHRRFZ3B

@misc{pith2026250906769,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Two-dimensional transducers},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/VHRRFZ3B}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.06769}
}

abstract

We define a bicategory $\mathbf{2TDX}$ whose 1-cells provide a categorification of transducers, computational devices extending finite-state automata with output capabilities. This bicategory is a mathematically interesting object: its objects are categories $\mathcal{A},\mathcal{B},\dots$ and its 1-cells $(\mathcal{Q}, t) : \mathcal{A} \to \mathcal{B}$ consist of a category $\mathcal{Q}$ of `states', and a profunctor $$ t : \mathcal{A} \times \mathcal{Q}^\text{op}\times\mathcal{Q} \times (\mathcal{B}^*)^\text{op} \to \mathbf{Set} $$ where $\mathcal{B}^*$ denotes the free monoidal category over $\mathcal{B}$. Extending $t$ to $\mathcal{A}^*$ in a canonical way, to each `word' $\underline a$ in $\mathcal{A}^*$ one attaches an endoprofunctor over the category $\mathcal{Q}$ of states, enriched over presheaves on $\mathcal{B}^*$. We discuss a number of other characterizations of the hom-category $\mathbf{2TDX}(\mathcal{A},\mathcal{B})$; we establish a Kleisli-like universal property for $\mathbf{2TDX}(\mathcal{A},\mathcal{B})$ and explore the connection of $\mathbf{2TDX}$ to other bicategories of computational models, such as Bob Walters' bicategory of `circuits'; it is convenient to regard $\mathbf{2TDX}$ as the loose bicategory of a double category $\mathbb{D}\mathbf{TDX}$: the bicategory (resp., double category) of profunctors is naturally contained in the bicategory (resp., double category) $\mathbf{2TDX}$ (resp., $\mathbb{D}\mathbf{TDX}$); we study the completeness and cocompleteness properties of $\mathbb{D}\mathbf{TDX}$, the existence of companions and conjoints, and we sketch how monads, adjunctions, and other structures/properties that naturally arise from the definition work in $\mathbb{D}\mathbf{TDX}$.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

19 extracted references · 19 canonical work pages

[1]

[ABM14] A. L. Agore, C.-G. Bontea, and G. Militaru,Classifying bicrossed products of Hopf algebras, Algebras and Representation Theory (2014). [ACIM09] A. L. Agore, A. Chirv ˘asitu, B. Ion, and G. Militaru,Bicrossed products for finite groups, Algebras and Representation Theory12(2009), no. 2–5, 481–488. [AK88] M.H. Albert and G.M. Kelly,The closure of a ...

work page 2014
[6]

270, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz- Zentrum f ¨ur Informatik, 2023, pp

(Dagstuhl, Germany) (Paolo Baldan and Valeria de Paiva, eds.), Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), vol. 270, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz- Zentrum f ¨ur Informatik, 2023, pp. 20:1–20:14. [BMT23] J.C. Baez, J. Moeller, and T. Trimble,Schur functors and categorified plethysm,

work page 2023
[12]

Jay,Local adjunctions, Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra53(1988), no

[Jay88] C.B. Jay,Local adjunctions, Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra53(1988), no. 3, 227–238. [JB88] C. Reutenauer J. Berstel,Rational series and their languages, 2008 electronic ed., EATCS Monographs on Theoretical Computer Science 12, Springer, Berlin,

work page 1988
[16]

Melli `es and N

[MZ23b] P .-A. Melli `es and N. Zeilberger,Parsing as a lifting problem and the Chomsky-Sch¨ utzenberger represen- tation theorem, Electronic Notes in Theoretical Informatics and Computer Science1(2023). [MZ25] P .-A. Melli `es and N. Zeilberger,The categorical contours of the Chomsky-Sch¨ utzenberger representation theorem, Logical Methods in Computer Sc...

work page 2023
[19]

3, 279–290

TWO-DIMENSIONAL TRANSDUCERS 51 [Woo82] ,Abstract proarrows I, Cahiers de topologie et g ´eometrie diff´erentielle categoriques23(1982), no. 3, 279–290. [Woo85] ,Proarrows II, Cahiers de topologie et g ´eom´etrie diff´erentielle cat ´egoriques26(1985), no. 2, 135–168. TallinnUniversity ofTechnology Email address:fosco.loregian@gmail.com

work page 1982
[298]

6, 171–200

[Par21b] ,Three easy pieces: Imaginary seminar talks in honour of Bob Rosebrugh, Theory and Applications of Categories36(2021), no. 6, 171–200. [Raj93] D. S. Rajan,The adjoints to the derivative functor on species, Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series A 62(1993), no. 1, 93–106. [RW88] R. Rosebrugh and R.J. Wood,Proarrows and cofibrations, Journal of Pu...

work page 2021
[1970]

Day and S

[DL07] B.J. Day and S. Lack,Limits of small functors, Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra210(2007), no. 3, 651–663. [DM96] R. Donagi and E. Markman,Spectral covers, algebraically completely integrable, hamiltonian systems, and moduli of bundles, Integrable Systems and Quantum Groups1620(1996), 1–119. [DMS19] U. Dorsch, S. Milius, and L. Schr ¨oder,Graded ...

work page 2007
[1978]

1, 5–62 (fr)

[Gui80] ,Tenseurs et machines, Cahiers de topologie et g ´eom´etrie diff ´erentielle21(1980), no. 1, 5–62 (fr). MR 569117 [Han10] H.H. Hansen,Subsequential transducers: a coalgebraic perspective, Information and Computation208 (2010), no. 12, 1368–1397. [Hor24] R. Hora,Topoi of automata I: Four topoi of automata and regular languages,

work page 1980

Show all 19 references

[1992]

Salomaa and M

[SS78] A. Salomaa and M. Soittola,Automata-theoretic aspects of formal power series, 1978 ed., Monographs in Computer Science, Springer, New York, NY, March 1978 (en). [SSVW17] P . Schultz, D. Spivak, C. Vasilakopoulou, and R. Wisnesky,Algebraic databases, Theory and Appli- ca...

1978
[1998]

Boccali, A

[BLLL23a] G. Boccali, A. Laretto, F. Loregian, and S. Luneia,Bicategories of automata, automata in bicategories, Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Applied Category Theory 2023 (University of Maryland) (Sam Staton and Christina Vasilakopoulou, eds.), Electron...

2023
[2003]

Beauville,Jacobians of spectral curves and completely integrable systems, Integrable Systems and Quantum Groups1620(1995), 25–31

[Bea95] A. Beauville,Jacobians of spectral curves and completely integrable systems, Integrable Systems and Quantum Groups1620(1995), 25–31. 18For example ifAis a topological space, the list construction yields a topological monoidA ∗ [GM19], of which thecommutant Comm(A):= {a...

1995
[2010]

2, 722–739 (eng)

[AM12] ,Schreier type theorems for bicrossed products, Open Mathematics10(2012), no. 2, 722–739 (eng). [AMV11] J. Ad ´amek, S. Milius, and J. Velebil,Coalgebraic analysis of probabilistic systems, Theoretical Computer Science412(2011), no. 38, 4989–5009. [BBT03] O. Babelon, D....

2012
[2018]

Kelly,Basic concepts of enriched category theory, Repr

[Kel05] G.M. Kelly,Basic concepts of enriched category theory, Repr. Theory Appl. Categ.64(2005), no. 10, vi+137. MR 2177301 [KKR83] S. Kasangian, G.M. Kelly, and F. Rossi,Cofibrations and the realization of non-deterministic automata, Cahiers de topologie et g ´eom´etrie diff...

2005 arXiv
[2019]

140, 2019, pp

(Dagstuhl, Germany), LIPIcs, vol. 140, 2019, pp. 36:1–36:16. [Eis02] J. Eisner,Parameter estimation for probabilistic finite-state transducers, Proceedings of the 40th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 2002, pp. 1–8. [Elg21] J. Elgueta,The groupo...

2019 arXiv
[2021]

Goubault and S

[GM19] E. Goubault and S. Mimram,Presentations of higher-dimensional automata, Logical Methods in Com- puter Science15(2019), no. 1, 1–38. [GP99] M. Grandis and R. Par ´e,Limits in double categories, Cahiers de Topologie et G ´eom´etrie Diff´erentielle Cat´egoriques40(1999), n...

2019
[2022]

[MU22b] ,Flexibly graded monads and graded algebras, Mathematics of Program Construction (Cham), Springer International Publishing, 2022, pp. 102–128. [MZ23a] P .-A. Melli `es and N. Zeilberger,The categorical contours of the Chomsky-Sch¨ utzenberger representation theorem, December

2022
[2023]

Betti and S

[BK81] R. Betti and S. Kasangian,A quasi-universal realization of automata., Universit `a degli Studi di Trieste. Dipartimento di Scienze Matematiche (1981), 41–48. [BK82] ,Una propriet` a del comportamento degli automi completi., Universit `a degli Studi di Trieste. Di- parti...

1981
[2024]

Boalch,Symplectic manifolds and isomonodromic deformations, Advances in Mathematics163(2001), no

[Boa01] P . Boalch,Symplectic manifolds and isomonodromic deformations, Advances in Mathematics163(2001), no. 2, 137–205. [Bor94] F. Borceux,Handbook of categorical algebra

2001
[2025]

Malgrange, ´Equations diff´ erentielles ` a coefficients polynomiaux, Progress in Mathematics96(1991), 313–371

[Mal91] B. Malgrange, ´Equations diff´ erentielles ` a coefficients polynomiaux, Progress in Mathematics96(1991), 313–371. [Moh04] M. Mohri,Weighted finite-state transducer algorithms: An overview, Formal Languages and Applica- tions (Carlos Mart´ın-Vide, Victor Mitrana, and G...

1991

Pith tools

Reviewed August 4, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

[ABM14] A. L. Agore, C.-G. Bontea, and G. Militaru,Classifying bicrossed products of Hopf algebras, Algebras and Representation Theory (2014). [ACIM09] A. L. Agore, A. Chirv ˘asitu, B. Ion, and G. Militaru,Bicrossed products for finite groups, Algebras and Representation Theory12(2009), no. 2–5, 481–488. [AK88] M.H. Albert and G.M. Kelly,The closure of a ...

work page 2014

[2] [6]

270, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz- Zentrum f ¨ur Informatik, 2023, pp

(Dagstuhl, Germany) (Paolo Baldan and Valeria de Paiva, eds.), Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), vol. 270, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz- Zentrum f ¨ur Informatik, 2023, pp. 20:1–20:14. [BMT23] J.C. Baez, J. Moeller, and T. Trimble,Schur functors and categorified plethysm,

work page 2023

[3] [12]

Jay,Local adjunctions, Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra53(1988), no

[Jay88] C.B. Jay,Local adjunctions, Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra53(1988), no. 3, 227–238. [JB88] C. Reutenauer J. Berstel,Rational series and their languages, 2008 electronic ed., EATCS Monographs on Theoretical Computer Science 12, Springer, Berlin,

work page 1988

[4] [16]

Melli `es and N

[MZ23b] P .-A. Melli `es and N. Zeilberger,Parsing as a lifting problem and the Chomsky-Sch¨ utzenberger represen- tation theorem, Electronic Notes in Theoretical Informatics and Computer Science1(2023). [MZ25] P .-A. Melli `es and N. Zeilberger,The categorical contours of the Chomsky-Sch¨ utzenberger representation theorem, Logical Methods in Computer Sc...

work page 2023

[5] [19]

3, 279–290

TWO-DIMENSIONAL TRANSDUCERS 51 [Woo82] ,Abstract proarrows I, Cahiers de topologie et g ´eometrie diff´erentielle categoriques23(1982), no. 3, 279–290. [Woo85] ,Proarrows II, Cahiers de topologie et g ´eom´etrie diff´erentielle cat ´egoriques26(1985), no. 2, 135–168. TallinnUniversity ofTechnology Email address:fosco.loregian@gmail.com

work page 1982

[6] [298]

6, 171–200

[Par21b] ,Three easy pieces: Imaginary seminar talks in honour of Bob Rosebrugh, Theory and Applications of Categories36(2021), no. 6, 171–200. [Raj93] D. S. Rajan,The adjoints to the derivative functor on species, Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series A 62(1993), no. 1, 93–106. [RW88] R. Rosebrugh and R.J. Wood,Proarrows and cofibrations, Journal of Pu...

work page 2021

[7] [1970]

Day and S

[DL07] B.J. Day and S. Lack,Limits of small functors, Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra210(2007), no. 3, 651–663. [DM96] R. Donagi and E. Markman,Spectral covers, algebraically completely integrable, hamiltonian systems, and moduli of bundles, Integrable Systems and Quantum Groups1620(1996), 1–119. [DMS19] U. Dorsch, S. Milius, and L. Schr ¨oder,Graded ...

work page 2007

[8] [1978]

1, 5–62 (fr)

[Gui80] ,Tenseurs et machines, Cahiers de topologie et g ´eom´etrie diff ´erentielle21(1980), no. 1, 5–62 (fr). MR 569117 [Han10] H.H. Hansen,Subsequential transducers: a coalgebraic perspective, Information and Computation208 (2010), no. 12, 1368–1397. [Hor24] R. Hora,Topoi of automata I: Four topoi of automata and regular languages,

work page 1980