The Experts below are selected from a list of 963 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Peter Tillers - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Are there Universal Principles or Forms of Evidential Inference? Of Inference Networks and Onto-Epistemology
Evidence Inference and Enquiry, 2011Co-Authors: Peter TillersAbstract:This chapter discusses the limitations of approaches to modelling and handling evidential issues using hierarchical network representations. Such models of evidential inference rest on the Compound Proposition that real-world evidential inference usually or always consists of Propositional ‘atoms’ (i.e. relatively granular Propositional statements about states of the world) that are linked together by nomological entities of some kind, entities that are often — but not always — called ‘generalisations’. These sorts of models or representations of evidential inference are referred to as ‘network-and-generalisation’ models of evidential inference. It is argued that for certain important problems, especially where these concern meaning and human understanding, these need to be complemented by other methods.
-
Are There Universal Principles or Forms of Evidential Inference
2007Co-Authors: Peter TillersAbstract:Although interest in evidential inference is not new - interest in the topic reaches back into antiquity - during the last two or three decades there has been a veritable explosion of scholarship and research about evidential inference. Furthermore, evidential inference (or "factual inference") is now an important topic in virtually every field of scholarship and in virtually every kind of "knowledge industry." Although the models of inference generated in this latest wave of scholarship and research are varied, one thread does run through many of the new models. Many contemporary accounts emphasize the multistage nature of evidential inference; it is now very often argued or assumed that evidential inference is best viewed as a network or web of inferences Although the proponents of such models of evidential inference often have important disagreements about the properties or structure of multistage evidential inference, it is fair to say that such models generally rest on the Compound Proposition that real-world evidential inference usually or always consists of "atoms" that are linked together (in some way) by "generalizations." If a model of this sort is a valid representation of evidential inference, the question may arise - the question has arisen - whether a model of this sort is or is not "universal." The answer is that this question is unanswerable. What can be said is that when human beings (or other agents) configure problems of evidence in a certain way, inference networks (of some sort) are inevitable and describe the structure of the problem at hand but that when problems of evidence are perceived (only) in certain other ways, representations of inference as webs of factual hypotheses connected by generalizations are of little or no use - simply because in some situations such web-like patterns of reasoning do not address the problem at hand. For example, sometimes the question is not how strongly some evidentiary phenomenon supports some hypothesis but, rather, what sort of complex of hypotheses or conceptual constructs most persuasively explains some set of phenomena. This latter sort of problem sometimes requires a constructive and imaginative conceptual activity that does not much resemble an inference network or its ingredients.
Xu Yang - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
on relation of Compound Proposition of modality and modal Proposition of Compound form
Journal of Shangrao Teachers College, 2002Co-Authors: Xu YangAbstract:This paper by constructing a logical sketch map about relation of values mainly depicts 4 equivalent expressions, 4 contradictory expressions and 32 implication expressions between conjunctive Proposition of modality or disjunctive Proposition of modality and modal Proposition of conjunctive form or modal Proposition of disjunctive form. These expressions are closely related to our practical thinking activities, and can be understood through examples by natural language, and be applied in thinking activities.
Li Xian-jun - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Inference of Compound Proposition and Three-dimensional Logical Square
Journal of Bijie University, 2010Co-Authors: Li Xian-junAbstract:Not only the Three-dimensional logical square may express between eight Compound Proposition genuine and fake restriction relations, but also may express between eight inference of Compound Proposition genuine and fake restriction relations.Namely simple inference of Compound Proposition invalid-like and complex inference of Compound Proposition invalid-like between the different distortion type and the denial form has the genuine and fake to restrict the relations.Thus, not only the Three-dimensional logical square souvenir object is restricted in the Compound Proposition, but also expands to the inference of Compound Proposition, has the universal serviceability.
-
Forever will be Real the Formula to Form at the Beginning of the System to Search
Journal of Bijie University, 2008Co-Authors: Li Xian-junAbstract:Forever will be real the formula also to call the tautology,will be divides one Proposition logic formula from the truth function angle.It forms the system will be orderly,then from between the traditional logic square matrix souvenir Compound Proposition and the simple Proposition genuine and fake restriction relations is the foundation,will infer orderly a series of forever to be real the formula.
Jean-françois Bonnefon - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Behavioral evidence for framing effects in the resolution of the doctrinal paradox
Social Choice and Welfare, 2010Co-Authors: Jean-françois BonnefonAbstract:The aggregation of individual sets of judgments over interconnected Propositions can yield inconsistent collective sets of judgments, even when the individual sets of judgments are themselves consistent. A doctrinal paradox occurs when majority voting on a Compound Proposition (such as a conjunction or disjunction) yields a different result than majority voting on each of the elements of the Proposition. For example, when most individuals accept Proposition X ; most individuals accept Proposition Y ; but only a minority of individuals accept the Compound Proposition ‘ X and Y ’. Conducting two elemental votes would lead to accept X and Y , but conducting one Compound vote would lead to reject X and Y . In such a situation, do people manifest a stable preference as to which voting procedure should be applied? This research reports the results of two behavioral experiments using a within-participant design, which show that procedural preferences can be upturned by framing either positively or negatively the set of judgments to be aggregated. This shift in procedural preference leads to large swings in the final collective judgment endorsed by participants.
Lian Shiyou - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
a truth computation method for implication Compound Proposition based on implication degree and implication rate
Computer Engineering and Applications, 2006Co-Authors: Lian ShiyouAbstract:文章通过分析蕴涵型复合命题的真假涵义,并引入蕴涵度和蕴涵率两种度量,而得到了一种关于蕴涵型复合命题的真值计算新方法,即支命题之间的实际蕴涵度或蕴涵率对复合命题中描述蕴涵关系特征的语言值的符合度就是该复合命题的真值.该方法统一了确定性和不确定性蕴涵型复合命题的真值求法,填补了不确定性蕴涵型复合命题真值计算的空白,因而将在机器推理特别是不确定性推理中发挥重要作用.