Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The set S = {42} has 42 as both an upper bound and a lower bound; all other numbers are either an upper bound or a lower bound for that S. Every subset of the natural numbers has a lower bound since the natural numbers have a least element (0 or 1, depending on convention). An infinite subset of the natural numbers cannot be bounded from above.
The Legendre sieve has a problem with fractional parts of terms accumulating into a large error, which means the sieve only gives very weak bounds in most cases. For this reason it is almost never used in practice, having been superseded by other techniques such as the Brun sieve and Selberg sieve. However, since these more powerful sieves are ...
A natural proof is a proof that establishes that a certain language lies outside of C and refers to a natural property that is useful against C. Razborov and Rudich give a number of examples of lower-bound proofs against classes C smaller than P/poly that can be "naturalized", i.e. converted
There is a corresponding greatest-lower-bound property; an ordered set possesses the greatest-lower-bound property if and only if it also possesses the least-upper-bound property; the least-upper-bound of the set of lower bounds of a set is the greatest-lower-bound, and the greatest-lower-bound of the set of upper bounds of a set is the least ...
In mathematical analysis, limit superior and limit inferior are important tools for studying sequences of real numbers.Since the supremum and infimum of an unbounded set of real numbers may not exist (the reals are not a complete lattice), it is convenient to consider sequences in the affinely extended real number system: we add the positive and negative infinities to the real line to give the ...
Research in proof complexity is predominantly concerned with proving proof-length lower and upper bounds in various propositional proof systems. For example, among the major challenges of proof complexity is showing that the Frege system , the usual propositional calculus , does not admit polynomial-size proofs of all tautologies.
Fano's inequality can be interpreted as a way of dividing the uncertainty of a conditional distribution into two questions given an arbitrary predictor. The first question, corresponding to the term (), relates to the uncertainty of the predictor.
The rebuttable presumption establishes a burden of proof; but the burden may be rebutted by evidence to the contrary. The civil standard of proof is "a balance of probabilities", while the criminal standard of proof is "beyond reasonable doubt". Here, different presumptions will apply, according to the class of agreement.