Resolution Refutation
Posted by CF
| Announcements | Last Post | |
|---|---|---|
 |
SoC Curricula | 09/30/2017 01:08PM |
|
Demarcation or scoping of examinations and assessment | 02/13/2017 07:59AM |
|
School of Computing Short Learning Programmes | 11/24/2014 08:37AM |
|
Unisa contact information | 07/28/2011 01:28PM |
|
Resolution Refutation August 31, 2006 11:38AM |
Just to clarify a point
If you have to prove by resolution refutation that something, say r, is a logical consequence of the set using the set of support strategy
1. Use the negation of r as the set of support and resolve to nil?
or
2. Use the final clause as the set of support and resolve to r?
Which method??
I am so tired of ploughing through endless stuff on the net just to find one answer! I wish we had been provided with more working examples to practice on.
I am at that stage when the exams are too far but too near!!
If you have to prove by resolution refutation that something, say r, is a logical consequence of the set using the set of support strategy
1. Use the negation of r as the set of support and resolve to nil?
or
2. Use the final clause as the set of support and resolve to r?
Which method??
I am so tired of ploughing through endless stuff on the net just to find one answer! I wish we had been provided with more working examples to practice on.
I am at that stage when the exams are too far but too near!!
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.