Live data from Hacker News

Viewing profile — permute

permute

HN member
Joined
Wed, May 27, 2026, 2:54 PM UTC
HN karma
134
Public activity
26 items

About permute

No profile information was provided.

Recent public activity

  1. comment
    Comment #49086972

    We could use floats internally and gain a lot of performance as I described in my response here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49085136 . With this we would still be able to…

  2. comment
    Comment #49086390

    The implementation of a function is in the CSG/Impl folder. A proof is in the CSG/Proof folder. They are both imported and tied together in the human reviewed file in a theorem tha…

  3. comment
    Comment #49086156

    Regarding fuzzing. It cannot find the special cases I listed in the readme, because these cases are very rare. Yet with formal verification we can prove that the implementation act…

  4. comment
    Comment #49086056

    Good question! One complication: For union the spec would look a little bit different than for intersection. I defined the solid associated to a mesh in a way that does not include…

  5. comment
    Comment #49085714

    The implementations uses exact rationals numbers. So there are no issues with numerical errors. We can do all geometrical operations exactly. Many performant implementations have a…

  6. comment
    Comment #49084883

    I learned working with the Isabelle proof assistant in a university course. There were weekly exercises and a group project at the end. (Actually proving things by hand, no LLM.) T…

  7. comment
    Comment #49084693

    Both the implementation and the proof are written in Lean. In the files I reference here https://github.com/schildep/verified-3d-mesh-intersection#mi... there are theorems about th…

  8. comment
    Comment #49084034

    I think this would need to be reimplemented for performance. But maybe the spec can be reused. As agents get better we might reimplement the same spec for performance with minimal …

  9. comment
    Comment #49083971

    It is possible to prove things involving floats, you just have to addionally trust a small set of axioms on floats. See https://github.com/schildep/verified-3d-mesh-intersection#pe…

  10. comment
    Comment #49083894

    Maybe what you mean is that kernels of proof assistants must be small. Here I am referring to a geometry processing kernel (that is formally verified by a proof assistant). The imp…

  11. comment
    Comment #49083776

    The runtime performance is most probably worse than yours. The goal of this project is a minimal specification that a reviewer can trust. See section in readme on performance and h…

  12. comment
    Comment #49083441

    Note that the claims are about the kernel that computes the mesh intersection, not the web demo: While the kernel is formally verified, the UI and glue code (that call the kernel) …

  13. story
    Show HN: Formally verified 3D CSG: Trust 93 lines spec, not 1000 lines AI code

    To my knowledge, this is the first formally verified implementation of a 3D constructive solid geometry (CSG) operation: mesh intersection, implemented in Lean 4 and verified again…

  14. comment
    Comment #48433386

    There are two things here: The proof and how you would represent that in a program that you actually can run. From the math side, I am confident that the construction and proof can…

  15. comment
    Comment #48433046

    Yes, it runs significantly longer. Opus 4.8 ran autonomously for about 8 hours to provide program and proof of correctness, given the formal specification. And in previous experime…

  16. comment
    Comment #48425333

    Sure, what the program does is not interesting by itself, neither is that you can use AI to create programs to do polygon intersection. The main feature, that I hope is interesting…

  17. comment
  18. comment
    Comment #48409911

    Thanks! Yes, I hope AI and Lean will enable formally verified practical software.

  19. comment
    Comment #48409863

    Thanks for the pointer, I will look into it. I think to do efficient formally verified geometry with floating point we would also need something like Shewchuk robust predicates. (I…

  20. comment
    Comment #48409710

    Thanks! I am currently working on a follow up project for 3D polyhedrons for which the case handling really starts to get tedious. It's nice when AI can handle it without humans ha…

  21. comment
    Comment #48409665

    Yes, the webassembly is compiled from lean. The JS UI that calls the webassembly is not built from lean and not formally verified. So a human reviewer that does not trust the code,…

  22. comment
    Comment #48409539

    Yes, the core supports exact rationals. This is easier to deal with in formal verification than floating point. I made the UI snap to a fixed precision, such that its easy to repro…

  23. story
    Show HN: Formally verified polygon intersection – Opus 4.8 oneshots, prev failed

    To my knowledge, this is the first formally verified implementation of an intersection algorithm for polygons. The experience of working with AI agents on this project changed a lo…

  24. story
  25. comment
    Comment #48319669

    I am using Claude Code for formal verification with Lean. In my personal experience both Opus 4.7 and now what I see from first experiments with Opus 4.8 were big improvements. I w…