Differenze tra le versioni di "Logica fuzzy"
(→Syntax) |
(→Syntax) |
||
Riga 27: | Riga 27: | ||
# if <math>\alpha, \beta \in form</math>, then <math> (\alpha\rightarrow\beta) \in FORM</math>. | # if <math>\alpha, \beta \in form</math>, then <math> (\alpha\rightarrow\beta) \in FORM</math>. | ||
Well formed formulas is often abbreviated with f.b.f. | Well formed formulas is often abbreviated with f.b.f. | ||
− | The strings in condition (2) are called "propositional variable" or "atomic | + | The strings in condition (2) are called "propositional variable" or "atomic formulas" or "propositional letters" or simply "variables". They are abbreviated with this notation: |
<math>X_1, X_2, X_3, ..., X_n</math>(In other books p, q, r, .., are used to refer to variables). <br>The set of variables is <math>VAR</math>.<br> | <math>X_1, X_2, X_3, ..., X_n</math>(In other books p, q, r, .., are used to refer to variables). <br>The set of variables is <math>VAR</math>.<br> | ||
<math>VAR \subset FORM</math><br> | <math>VAR \subset FORM</math><br> | ||
Riga 38: | Riga 38: | ||
It is essential, even, that the L.P.C. language is decidability, that is it must exist an algorithm that tell us if a string is <math> \in FORM</math> or not. | It is essential, even, that the L.P.C. language is decidability, that is it must exist an algorithm that tell us if a string is <math> \in FORM</math> or not. | ||
For this reason it is crucial the <br> | For this reason it is crucial the <br> | ||
− | '''Unique readability of well formed formulas'''. For all <math> \alpha \in FORM </math>one (and | + | '''Unique readability of well formed formulas'''. For all <math> \alpha \in FORM </math>one (and only one) of the following sentences must be true: |
#<math>\alpha = \bot</math> or <math> \alpha = \top</math> but not both. | #<math>\alpha = \bot</math> or <math> \alpha = \top</math> but not both. | ||
#Exists an unique <math>n \in \mathbb{N}</math> such that <math>\alpha = X_n</math>. | #Exists an unique <math>n \in \mathbb{N}</math> such that <math>\alpha = X_n</math>. | ||
Riga 46: | Riga 46: | ||
#Exist unique <math>\beta, \gamma \in FORM</math> such that <math>\alpha = (\beta \rightarrow \gamma)</math>. | #Exist unique <math>\beta, \gamma \in FORM</math> such that <math>\alpha = (\beta \rightarrow \gamma)</math>. | ||
Let's, infact, consider the parser of the algorithm we talked above: | Let's, infact, consider the parser of the algorithm we talked above: | ||
− | When it find, for example, <math>\neg(\alpha \and \beta)</math>, to decide if the string | + | When it find, for example, <math>\neg(\alpha \and \beta)</math>, to decide if the string belongs to FORM, it have to decide (for the unique readability of well formed formulas) if <math>\alpha \and \beta \in FORM</math>. But how can it do this? Deciding if <math>\alpha \in FORM</math> and <math>\beta \in FORM</math>. |
This is what the above theorem tell us. Try to draw the parser tree. It is unique thanks to, again, that theorem. | This is what the above theorem tell us. Try to draw the parser tree. It is unique thanks to, again, that theorem. | ||
Riga 57: | Riga 57: | ||
<math>\beta = (X_1 \and \qquad \gamma = (X_1 \and X_2)</math><br> | <math>\beta = (X_1 \and \qquad \gamma = (X_1 \and X_2)</math><br> | ||
<math>\beta, \gamma</math> are both substring of <math>\alpha</math> but only <math>\gamma</math> is a subformula. | <math>\beta, \gamma</math> are both substring of <math>\alpha</math> but only <math>\gamma</math> is a subformula. | ||
− | With <math>Var(\alpha)</math> we indicate the set of | + | With <math>Var(\alpha)</math> we indicate the set of variables that are subformulas of <math>\alpha</math>. |
− | With <math>\alpha(X_1, X_2, .., X_n)</math> we denote a formula whose | + | With <math>\alpha(X_1, X_2, .., X_n)</math> we denote a formula whose variables are a '''subset''' of <math>\{X_1, X_2, .., X_n\}</math>. |
=== Giudizio sul corso === | === Giudizio sul corso === |
Versione delle 19:53, 13 ott 2012
Questa è una pagina di introduzione al corso: contiene i turni, le modalità d'insegnamento, alcune informazioni generali ed eventuali giudizi sul corso in questione. Se sei giunto qui passando da un link, puoi tornare indietro e correggerlo in modo che punti direttamente alla voce appropriata. |
Indice
A.A. passati
Information
Course's website
Times and classrooms:
Monday 15:30 - 17:30 - Room 5 (Ground floor - via comelico 39)
Friday 10:30 - 12:30 - Room 5
Lessons' notes
This notes are written in english to help foreign students to follow this course.
Classical Propositional Logic
Lesson 1 - 5th october
In this lesson we are going to describe the classical propositional logic (L.P.C) language.
Syntax
Let's be the set of the natural numbers and an alphabet of symbols.
is the set of strings on this alphabet. For example .
We have now to define the set of the "well formed formula" , that is the set of the elements of the L.P.C.
Definition (well formed formulas). is defined with some conditions:
, where | is taken n times. For example:- if , then .
- if , then .
- if , then .
- if , then .
Well formed formulas is often abbreviated with f.b.f.
The strings in condition (2) are called "propositional variable" or "atomic formulas" or "propositional letters" or simply "variables". They are abbreviated with this notation:
(In other books p, q, r, .., are used to refer to variables).
The set of variables is .
Example of well formed formulas:
Instead
In this notes we omit (, ) where it is clear the precedence of the connectives. (Connectives are )
Why don't we use directly or ?
Because it is important that the alphabet is a finited set. Although, in this notes, we use notation.
It is essential, even, that the L.P.C. language is decidability, that is it must exist an algorithm that tell us if a string is or not.
For this reason it is crucial the
Unique readability of well formed formulas. For all one (and only one) of the following sentences must be true:
- or but not both.
- Exists an unique such that .
- Exists an unique such that .
- Exist unique such that .
- Exist unique such that .
- Exist unique such that .
Let's, infact, consider the parser of the algorithm we talked above: When it find, for example, , to decide if the string belongs to FORM, it have to decide (for the unique readability of well formed formulas) if . But how can it do this? Deciding if and . This is what the above theorem tell us. Try to draw the parser tree. It is unique thanks to, again, that theorem.
Formally, a string is a finite sequence of elements:
A substring of is a string in the form , where and .
A subformula is a substring .
For example:
are both substring of but only is a subformula.
With we indicate the set of variables that are subformulas of .
With we denote a formula whose variables are a subset of .
Giudizio sul corso
I giudizi di seguito espressi sono il parere personale degli studenti, e potrebbero non rispecchiare il parere medio dei frequentanti. Non vi è comunque alcun intento di mettere alla gogna i docenti del corso!