Toward the interpretation of non-constructive reasoning as non-monotonic learning
Information and Computation, ISSN: 0890-5401, Vol: 207, Issue: 1, Page: 63-81
2009
- 11Citations
- 7Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
We study an abstract representation of the learning process, which we call learning sequence, aiming at a constructive interpretation of classical logical proofs, that we see as learning strategies, coming from Coquand’s game theoretic interpretation of classical logic. Inspired by Gold’s notion of limiting recursion and by the Limit-Computable Mathematics by Hayashi, we investigate the idea of learning in the limit in the general case, where both guess retraction and resumption are allowed. The main contribution is the characterization of the limits of non-monotonic learning sequences in terms of the extension relation between guesses.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0890540108001363; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ic.2008.10.003; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=58149510947&origin=inward; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0890540108001363; https://api.elsevier.com/content/article/PII:S0890540108001363?httpAccept=text/xml; https://api.elsevier.com/content/article/PII:S0890540108001363?httpAccept=text/plain; https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ic.2008.10.003
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know