OK, that makes sense. In that case, though, why not invent a new SpecialAllLink which has the desired properties? Inventing one new link for this would be more economical, and less confusing than having six new links:
ImplicationScope IntentionalImplicationScope ExtensionalImplicationScope EquivalenceScope IntensionalEquivalenceScope ExtensionalEquivalenceScope which is what the current code does. Besides, come the day you want to change the PLN formula, or create yet another one, you would just need a NewFormulaLink instead of six new links. --linas On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 4:23 PM, Ben Goertzel <[email protected]> wrote: > If we have > > > ImplicationScopeLink > > VariableNode x > > P(x) > > Q(x) > > then e.g. PLN can assign this a truth value equal to > > Sum_x ( max( P(x), Q(x)) ) / Sum_x P(x) > > or > > Sum_x ( P(x) * Q(x) ) / Sum_x P(x) > > but may assign a quite different truth value for > > ForAllLink > VariableNode x > ImplicationLink > P(x) > Q(x) > > > PLN does assign these two constructs different uncertain truth values, > so this is not just a theoretical difference... > > Other uncertain logic frameworks may also assign the two constructs > different TVs, I would think... > > ben > -- > Ben Goertzel, PhD > http://goertzel.org > > “I tell my students, when you go to these meetings, see what direction > everyone is headed, so you can go in the opposite direction. Don’t > polish the brass on the bandwagon.” – V. S. Ramachandran > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "opencog" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/opencog. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/CAHrUA378H0j_u_FN0mrBX6Nm%3Dx36nco2Z9b4up%2BxEzYCpDmh7A%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
