Inference rules

We need some rules of inference, to allow us to deduce new "theorems" from the theorems and axioms already established. The simplest choice of inference rules for our system is perhaps the Rules of Consequence ... 

Observe that we have in this procedure worked out some of the steps previously left to the THEOREM PROVER, The previous procedure involves having the progranmer select a set of inductive assertions and critical points, and then feed this into the computer parts a VERIFICATION CONDITION GENERATOR and a THEOREM PROVER. In this alternative construction we still need inductive assertions as the nature of the Rule of Iteration for WHILE statements shows. Now the inductive assertions are fed directly into the THEOREM PROVER which las been augmented by the special axioms and rules D0,D1,D2,D3 and D4 in addition to all of the usual arithmetic axioms, rules of inference, rules for handling identities and special axioms for the primitives in question (such as the factorial axioms in our example). In effect the THEOREM PROVER works backwards from the output condition and the various inductive assertions using DO - D3 to find what amounts to path verification conditions -... 

Using frameworks to define the meaning of the very modeling constructs themselves— and even to define and encapsulate known inference rules—is very similar to the approach in Larch [Guttag90], Their application to Catalysis modeling constructs, UML stereotype-based extension, and new modeling constructs and notations is described in [D Souza97a],... 

The inference rules used in arguments are of three basic types ... 

Hip-flop inference rule is simple If a variable is assigned a value under the control of a clock edge, a flip-flop is generated an exception to this rule is when a variable is assigned and used only locally within an always statement as an intermediate variable. 

It is important to understand the flip-flop inference rules of a synthesis tool. These rules may vary from one synthesis tool to another. If the inference rules are not followed, a synthesized netlist may have many more flip-flops than are really necessary. Here is a case in point. 

Reasoning based on fuzzy propositions of the four types, possibly quantified by various fuzzy quantifiers, is usually referred to as approximate reasoning. Although approximate reasoning is currently a subject of intensive research, its basic principles are already well established. For example, the most common inference rules of classical logic, such as modus ponens,... 

Series of inference rules can be developed for estimating and ranking the separate extensions generated at each level with respect to the available spectral information. For example, such a system of selection rules has been developed in the case of availability of 2D NMR information. The various 2D NMR techniques may be used as powerful structure inference tools. 

The best known inference rule is the modus ponens ... 

Resolution Computationally advantageous inference rule for proving theorems. 

Types of Automation Theorem Provers - fully formal machine-checked proofs, in which the theorem prover attempts to produce a formal proof, given a description of tbe system, a set of logical axioms and a set of inference rules. Model Checkers - automated proof of model against tbe specification, in which the model checker verifies certain properties by means of a search of possible states of a system. 

Define the set of fuzzy inference rules (Fuzzy Rule Base, FRB), which relate the linguistic terms (fuzzy sets) of the input physical variables to those of the output level of the IF considered. 

Once the inference rules have been established, a group of experts can choose, into a continue interval (1-10), the risk factors values that best fits with their own feeling about the situation. The combination of S, O, D values determines, as for the influence factors, the... 

Proofs in mill i are given in terms of proof trees that are inference rule composition over judgments. Judgments are pairs of a set of formulas E and a formula

logical consequence of the conjunction of those of E. Inference rules ( -ary) are relations between n + judgments that are noted as follows ... 

Inference rules play a fundamental role in any reasoning paradigm, because any reasoning... 

Table 1. Experience-based reasoning Eight inference rules...

Inverse modus ponens (IMP) is also an inference rule in EBR. The inverse in the definition is motivated by the fact that the inverse is defined in logic if- / then provided that ifp then q is given (Sun Finnie, 2004b). Based on this definition, the inverse of P Q is and... 

The last inference rule for EBR is inverse modus ponens with trick (fMPT). The difference between IMPT and inverse modus ponens is again with trick this is because the reasoning performer tries to use the trick of make a feint to the east and attack in the west — that is, he gets Q rather than in the inverse modus ponens. 

These eight inference rules provide a logical foundation for any EBR paradigms at the fundamental (or atomic) level, so thatthey can be applied to both benevolent and deceptive agent societies. In what follows, we give several examples to illustrate this view (Finnie Sun, 2005). 

Abduction is another common sense inference rule underpinning the marketplace if a seller agent S has goods available for delivery D, s/he will make them available for sale. That is ... 

Deductive learning is based on the existence of a language in which we can express axioms (a theory) and inference rules. These rules are used to produce all valid consequences of the axioms. Recently a particular kind of deductive learning, called Explanation-Based Learning (EBL), has been proposed [13,17]. This method works by generalizing a proof which explains why a particular example is a positive instance of the concept. The explanation-based learning methodology is defined in table 2. 

---