Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Implication alone is not functionally complete as a logical operator because one cannot form all other two-valued truth functions from it.. For example, the two-place truth function that always returns false is not definable from → and arbitrary propositional variables: any formula constructed from → and propositional variables must receive the value true when all of its variables are ...
A set C of attributes is a concept intent if and only if C respects all valid implications. The system of all valid implications therefore suffices for constructing the closure system of all concept intents and thereby the concept hierarchy. The system of all valid implications of a formal context is closed under the natural inference.
An axiomatic system is a set of axioms or assumptions from which other statements (theorems) are logically derived. [97] In propositional logic, axiomatic systems define a base set of propositions considered to be self-evidently true, and theorems are proved by applying deduction rules to these axioms. [98] See § Syntactic proof via axioms.
Logical consequence (also entailment or logical implication) is a fundamental concept in logic which describes the relationship between statements that hold true when one statement logically follows from one or more statements.
In philosophy and artificial intelligence (especially, knowledge based systems), the ramification problem is concerned with the indirect consequences of an action. It might also be posed as how to represent what happens implicitly due to an action or how to control the secondary and tertiary effects of an action.
In mathematical logic and graph theory, an implication graph is a skew-symmetric, directed graph G = (V, E) composed of vertex set V and directed edge set E. Each vertex in V represents the truth status of a Boolean literal, and each directed edge from vertex u to vertex v represents the material implication "If the literal u is true then the ...
Going from a statement to its converse is the fallacy of affirming the consequent.However, if the statement S and its converse are equivalent (i.e., P is true if and only if Q is also true), then affirming the consequent will be valid.
In propositional logic, material implication [1] [2] is a valid rule of replacement that allows a conditional statement to be replaced by a disjunction in which the antecedent is negated. The rule states that P implies Q is logically equivalent to not- P {\displaystyle P} or Q {\displaystyle Q} and that either form can replace the other in ...