Jason Morris
09/10/2022, 7:21 PMNick Smith
09/11/2022, 2:36 AMJason Morris
09/11/2022, 3:08 AMNick Smith
09/11/2022, 3:12 AMJack Rusher
09/12/2022, 1:44 PMJason Morris
09/12/2022, 4:55 PMJack Rusher
09/13/2022, 1:19 PMJason Morris
09/13/2022, 7:23 PMp(X)
has a logically negated opposite -p(X)
. And you can force at least one to be true in every model with -p(X) :- not p(X). p(X) :- not -p(X).
, which has a shorthand #abducible p(X).
, which is what I mean by "maybe". So similar to the semweb approach (mutually exclusive opposites), but I maybe not with regard to multiple world semantics, or even loops over negation, etc? Not sure. If what I'm trying to model is what the user knows, I need to be able to model "I know it is either true or false, but I don't know which". Which is why I think of the "maybe" as part of the model, not part of the reasoning. Does that make sense, or am I missing something.Jack Rusher
09/14/2022, 10:02 PMJason Morris
09/21/2022, 10:21 PM