User blog comment:Tetramur/BEAF above SVO - comparison/@comment-5150073-20200219121934/@comment-35470197-20200219140127

But as Plain'N'Simple pointed out, explanation by Bowers conflicts the alternative approach by Saibian, doesn't it? Then (even if Bowers agrees that it is formalised at that level), it does not mean that the original BEAF has been formalised at that level.

Also, you yourself referred to Bowers explanation, and said "But... no clues how to solve, for example, X^(X^^X+1) vs. (X^^X)*X." Doesn't it mean that Bowers original description does not characterise a single expansion?