MHB Solving Your Problem: Troubleshooting Mistakes in Code

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the correct interpretation of quantifiers in logical statements, specifically regarding the scope of quantifiers in mathematical expressions. A key point raised is the convention that the scope of a quantifier is often considered maximal, meaning it extends as far to the right as possible. For example, the expression "for all y, if y is an Animal, then x loves y" is interpreted as "for all y, (Animal(y) implies Loves(x, y))" rather than "if for all y, Animal(y), then Loves(x, y)." This maximal scope interpretation is not universally accepted, as some textbooks advocate for a minimal scope approach. The discussion emphasizes the importance of understanding these conventions to avoid misinterpretation in logical reasoning.
shivajikobardan
Messages
637
Reaction score
54
https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/gIpHfdMTJMBg2-cMkBWqVQYyAUKTwBCzc30JXJ054wfj06IBGeeXFdHd1-VO0J6EFrssOlAe3ntqJaVHSakLZAK8x4BI6pRL5Lb0JWUdDEuaxAm4NPAiUMvtOSLqjrOkH8r0VOv7

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/HharKN7rVu5NqPPR9lnd4nHr1fASlCPYNvc7zkLqrhrXMRJQVI_fgsL2Vu-Zgls2ycL8QUgF6IRNIAENcyw9E5KslY-UvkOma_dT__Mcozf_dQ66aLWPvxX58qhEq37H96KUUg6F

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/_zbkQuNFRy7N3B_u0Oz1ESBh19xov4y98iWyeWuy6-m9He33SWC3BGEnYSDjii8r-_1zmiUKeakvLZSq1dBjQ4JZugG6Z6_TLd4u0_WjGUXh8KUZm1xY2LNVd8GHrRQ8ZJh7mjQV

As you can see I am not getting correct result. What have I messed up? I want to learn it.

https://slideplayer.com/slide/4942120/
Here is full slide in case anyone wants to refer to it.
 
Technology news on Phys.org
The slides use the convention that the scope of a quantifier is maximal, i.e., it extends as far to the right as possible. In particular, $\forall y\,\text{Animal}(y)\Rightarrow \text{Loves}(x, y)$ means $\forall y\,(\text{Animal}(y)\Rightarrow \text{Loves}(x, y))$ and not $(\forall y\,\text{Animal}(y))\Rightarrow \text{Loves}(x, y)$, as you wrote in the first photo. This convention is not universal, however. Quite a few textbooks view the scope of a quantifier as being as small as possible.
 
Thread 'Is this public key encryption?'

Thread 'Is this public key encryption?'

I've tried to intuit public key encryption but never quite managed. But this seems to wrap it up in a bow. This seems to be a very elegant way of transmitting a message publicly that only the sender and receiver can decipher. Is this how PKE works? No, it cant be. In the above case, the requester knows the target's "secret" key - because they have his ID, and therefore knows his birthdate.
View full post »

Similar threads

Python Solving UnboundLocalError for Python Iterative Deepening Depth First Search
Replies
1
Views
1K
MHB Few confusions about halting problem is unsolvable proof-:
Replies
2
Views
830
MHB When is a problem said to be decidable or undecidable?
Replies
1
Views
1K
MHB Lucene Indexing: Clearing Confusion
Replies
1
Views
1K
MHB Why is Fragmentation Offset Multiple of 8? Understanding IPv4 Fragmentation
Replies
1
Views
3K
MHB Calculating Probabilities in Poker Hand: An Example
Replies
1
Views
2K
MHB Designing a Markov Model for Coke and Pepsi Purchases
Replies
1
Views
1K
MHB Halting problem is undecidable proof confusion-:
Replies
1
Views
1K
What is the weight of block D in this equilibrium of particles problem?
Replies
5
Views
1K
Tesla's Vortex (Mathologer Coding Competition)
Replies
2
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top