Precedence of logical operators

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter 0131313131313
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Operators
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the precedence of logical operators, exploring the conventions that dictate their order of operations, particularly in contexts where parentheses are not used. Participants examine the reasoning behind these conventions and propose potential research projects related to operator prioritization.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Debate/contested, Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that the precedence of operations is largely based on convention, though this can vary depending on the notation used.
  • One participant notes that parentheses can clarify the order of operations when precedence is ambiguous.
  • A participant reflects on their past research regarding the reasoning behind logical operator precedence, questioning the lack of deeper justification beyond convention.
  • Another participant introduces the idea that operator precedence could be related to intellectual complexity, referencing Jean Piaget's work.
  • Proposals for future research include establishing a prioritization of operators based on complexity and comparing computations resulting from different precedence rules.
  • The discussion hints at the relevance of similar questions in the context of mathematical operators.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the basis for operator precedence, with some emphasizing convention and others suggesting a deeper intellectual rationale. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the justification for operator prioritization.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the lack of consensus on the reasoning behind operator precedence and the potential influence of associative and commutative properties on evaluation order.

0131313131313
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
based on what is it concluded that this is operation precedes that operation?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Convention mostly, but it may not always be obvious what those are, especially in texts that are liberal in use of non-standard notation. Even so, most notations allow use parenthesis of some kind to specify the precise order, if needed. Note that evaluation precedence also often are "affected" if operators are associative or commutative (like, (a+b)+c is same as a+(b+c) so you do not need a precedence rule in this case).
 
Thank you for the answer.
 
In 1997 I did considerable research on the reasoning behind the precedence of logical operators in a parenthesis-free notation, asking why certain ones took priority. Obviously, there has to be an agreement for the convention; otherwise, there would be no consistent computations. Yet, I really could not find anyone with a reason beyond the ordering being a convention. However, if one looks again at people like Jean Piaget, s/he will find that there can be an ordering based on intellectual complexity, let's say the "vee" operator being more complicated than the material implication one. Further, one must consider the Table of Functional Completeness, where there are, in reality 16 operators, which, also - by the way - are results of computations. How are ALL operators prioritized? Such an exercise does not readily come to light because 1) most problems have the variables and operators already grouped, and 2) most persons only use the standard four or those plus ones like nand and xor.

Two projects that would intrigue me are:

A) Establish a prioritization of operators based on intellectual complexity, such as alluded to by Piaget in his "Logic and Psychology"
B) Do a comparison of the computations resulting from different prioritization, including a comparison from the results in the above proposal and the standard rendition.

Incidentally, the question may be asked of mathematical operators, as well.

My paper is at: http://home.earthlink.net/~jhorne18 , "Logic as the language of innate order...".
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K