Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
It is the negation of material implication. That is to say that for any two propositions P {\displaystyle P} and Q {\displaystyle Q} , the material nonimplication from P {\displaystyle P} to Q {\displaystyle Q} is true if and only if the negation of the material implication from P {\displaystyle P} to Q {\displaystyle Q} is true.
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 ...
The material conditional (also known as material implication) is an operation commonly used in logic. When the conditional symbol → {\displaystyle \rightarrow } is interpreted as material implication, a formula P → Q {\displaystyle P\rightarrow Q} is true unless P {\displaystyle P} is true and Q {\displaystyle Q} is false.
material conditional (material implication) implies, if P then Q, it is not the case that P and not Q propositional logic, Boolean algebra, Heyting algebra: is false when A is true and B is false but true otherwise. may mean the same as
Therefore, it is true that either (a) if John is in London then he is in France, or (b) if he is in Paris then he is in England." Using material implication, if John is not in London then (a) is true; whereas if he is in London then, because he is not in Paris, (b) is true. Either way, the conclusion that at least one of (a) or (b) is true is ...
Rules of inference are syntactical transform rules which one can use to infer a conclusion from a premise to create an argument. A set of rules can be used to infer any valid conclusion if it is complete, while never inferring an invalid conclusion, if it is sound.
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.
Formal contexts with finitely many attributes possess a canonical basis of valid implications, [3] i.e., an irredundant family of valid implications from with all valid implications can be inferred. This basis consists of all implications of the form P → P "\ P , where P is a pseudo-intent , i.e., a pseudo-closed set in the closure system of ...