Metropolis-Hastings using Markov categories!
A work by Rob Cornish and Andi Wang.
arxiv.org/abs/2601.22911
Posts by Paolo Perrone
More on the relationship between string diagrams and probabilistic graphical models.
New work by Antonio Lorenzin and Fabio Zanasi.
arxiv.org/abs/2512.09908
Descent in Probability Theory: the first steps down
youtu.be/VG2RTE1R0BY?...
Anyone in Milan tomorrow?
"Independent States Are Orthogonal", a talk at GSI 2025 bridging probability and geometry.
youtu.be/mUPJEt3FeiU
New introduction to Categorical Probability for Physicists, by Tomáš Gonda:
www.youtube.com/live/eVfFuIG...
Great work by Areeb Shah-Mohammed on partial morphisms in Markov categories.
arxiv.org/abs/2509.05094
We should call it 'connecting the DOTS'.
A categorical definition of independence!
Here is a recording of the talk I gave at CT 2025, for anyone who might have missed it.
youtu.be/ls6zOX8L1eI
The document that started categorical probability, part of secret work from 1962, has reappeared, together with new commentaries of its author, Bill Lawvere.
lawverearchives.com/wp-content/u...
Thanks to Tobias Fritz and to the Lawvere Archives for the work.
It seems that it's the year of double categories.
I'm excited to be in Bologna for the week!
(If anyone is here and wants to meet, write me an email.)
Me, every time the EU "wants to attract researchers":
We start in 10 minutes!
What are point-free measurable spaces, and what is their quantum equivalent?
Great work by Tobias Fritz and Antonio Lorenzin.
arxiv.org/abs/2504.13708
To all my UK-based mutual are into 'cybernetics', I very strongly recommend this exhibition in London.
www.tate.org.uk/whats-on/tat...
Wait, espresso doesn't make you think about math?
If there was anybody competent in charge in Europe we would be passing emergency legislation this week so that starting next week we poach every scientist from the US who was previously funded by NSF, NIH etc. Oh well, we can dream.
Using "many" for something that's counted by a natural number and "much" for something that's counted by a real number (and a unit, usually) is actually a good approximation.
Excited to be in Seattle for the JMM!
Besides ACT today and categorical probability on Saturday, which sessions are my fellow category theorists attending?
(Reposting)
One thing that we don't stress enough is that the correspondence morphisms-programs is true also *outside* the cartesian closed (=functional) case.
Morphisms are programs, regardless of whether they form their own object/type or not.
I don't know if this models all the examples you have in mind, but in every monoidal category, the monoidal unit is canonically a monoid.
Lyckönskningar!
Yes. (Or at least a decategorification thereof.)