# Re: 3vl 2vl and NULL

From: Hugo Kornelis <hugo_at_pe_NO_rFact.in_SPAM_fo>

Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2005 23:55:46 +0100

Message-ID: <og5cp1tdls9ff8gcudu792a7cd54qgotit_at_4ax.com>

Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2005 23:55:46 +0100

Message-ID: <og5cp1tdls9ff8gcudu792a7cd54qgotit_at_4ax.com>

On Tue, 6 Dec 2005 10:10:33 +0200, x wrote:

(snip)

>But this make sense ?

*>T & T = 100% T
**>T & F = 100% F
**>F & F = 100% F
**>T & U = 50%T 50% F = U
**>F & U = 0%T 100% F = F
**>U & U = 25%T 75% F
*

Hi x,

If you **DEFINE** unknown to be equivalent to 50%T 50%F, then the first five lines do make sense. The last one doesn't. (It does in Monte Carlo, but we're not dealing with probability here - we're dealing with 3VL algebra, an extension to the original "2VL" boolean algebra).

T & T = T ( = 100% T ) T & F = F ( = 100% F ) F & F = F ( = 100% F ) T & U = U ( = 50% T 50% F - *IF* we define it as such) F & U = F ( = 100% F ) U & U = U ( = 50% T 50% F )

Best, Hugo

-- (Remove _NO_ and _SPAM_ to get my e-mail address)Received on Tue Dec 06 2005 - 23:55:46 CET