Differenze tra le versioni di "Logica fuzzy"
(→Sintax) |
(→Sintax) |
||
Riga 33: | Riga 33: | ||
<math>(((X_1 \and X_2) \or \top) \rightarrow (X_1 \or \bot)) \in FORM</math><br>Instead<br> | <math>(((X_1 \and X_2) \or \top) \rightarrow (X_1 \or \bot)) \in FORM</math><br>Instead<br> | ||
<math>(X_1 \and \and) \notin FORM</math><br> | <math>(X_1 \and \and) \notin FORM</math><br> | ||
+ | In this notes we omit (, ) where it is clear the precedence of the connectives.<br> | ||
'''Why don't we use directly '''<math>X_1, X_2, ... </math> or <math>p, q, r, s, ...</math>? <br> | '''Why don't we use directly '''<math>X_1, X_2, ... </math> or <math>p, q, r, s, ...</math>? <br> | ||
Because it is important that '''the alphabet is a finited set'''. Although, in this notes, we use <math>X_1, X_2, ..., </math>notation. | Because it is important that '''the alphabet is a finited set'''. Although, in this notes, we use <math>X_1, X_2, ..., </math>notation. | ||
− | It is | + | 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 | + | For this reason it is crucial the <br> |
'''Unique readability of well formed formulas'''. For all <math> \alpha \in FORM </math>one (and ony one) of the following sentences must be true: | '''Unique readability of well formed formulas'''. For all <math> \alpha \in FORM </math>one (and ony 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. | ||
Riga 44: | Riga 45: | ||
#Exist unique <math>\beta, \gamma \in FORM</math> such that <math>\alpha = (\beta \or \gamma)</math>. | #Exist unique <math>\beta, \gamma \in FORM</math> such that <math>\alpha = (\beta \or \gamma)</math>. | ||
#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: | ||
+ | When it find, for example, <math>\neg(\alpha \and \beta)</math>, to decide if the string belong 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. | ||
=== Giudizio sul corso === | === Giudizio sul corso === |
Versione delle 13:34, 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.
Sintax
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 element 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 formula" or "propositional letter" or simply "variable". 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.
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 ony 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 belong 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.
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!