User blog comment:P進大好きbot/Evaluation of Analysis/@comment-30754445-20181120105029/@comment-30754445-20181120130336

Madore's own extension which is found in the wikipedia, of-course. I'm not aware of any other version of Psi where the limit of n functions is given as psi(psi_1(psi_2(psi_3(...)))).

"To be fair, I decided to list them from the aspect of the reproducibility. It does not matter if it is completely correct and there is no ambiguity only among you"

Huh?

"No ambiguity among the experts" is precisely the standard by which these things are evaluated even in peer-reviewed journals. In this case, "expert" means an experienced googologist(*). The fact that (say) a set theorist with little googology experience cannot reproduce something, does not mean that this "something" is not reproducable.

"For example, if googologists here are using UNOCF in the future in their "classical" analysis because they all share a common unwritten "definition" in their mind, could you regard it as a well-defined bona-fide standard notation?"

Of-course not, because UNOCF is not well-defined at all.

But If it were well-defined, and if people were commonly using it here (and using it correctly), and if it was always easy to tell when this notation is used (rather than some other OCF) then yes: In such a case, it would be wrong to downgrade the level of an analysis solely based on the fact that the line "we're using UNOCF here" is missing.

And this is especially true for analyses that don't claim to be regorous proofs, anyway. I could understand downgrading a level 5 to a level 4 for this reason, but not a downgrade from 3 to 2 (or even 4 to 3). For level 4 and below, if people can reasonably infer what function is being used, and if this function is well-defined, then that should be enough even if it isn't 100% formal.

(*)Part of the confusion here is that there are many noobs who think they are experts. By "experienced googologist" I mean a person who methodically and seriously studied the topic of large numbers, their notations, and various techniques for creating them including OCFs. The number of "experienced googologists" currently on this wiki can probably be counted on one hand (though there used to be more of us, not that long ago).