That&#x27;s interesting.  It takes me back to the &#x27;80s, when the logic-based AI people were in charge.<p>The &quot;propagator&quot; paper would be more interesting if there was a use case in the paper.  The basic idea is to have a graph of computational elements, but insist that the elements be commutative, associative, and idempotent. Under those restrictions, you get the same answer despite race conditions, which leads to a simple model of asynchronous programming.  But what is this good for? I could sort of see a theorem prover that works like this.  Beyond logic problems, it&#x27;s harder to find an application.<p>This might be a good way to implement consistent-eventually systems.  Those are hard to get right, and having to build them out of elements which have the propagator components might help.  Not sure this is possible, but it&#x27;s worth a try if you have to solve that problem.