This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision Last revision Both sides next revision | ||
teaching:is:diag-rules-solutions [2020/06/09 14:57] Franconi Enrico |
teaching:is:diag-rules-solutions [2020/06/09 15:14] Franconi Enrico |
||
---|---|---|---|
Line 43: | Line 43: | ||
(b) The minimal explanations of //get_gun ∧ goto_bank// are { // | (b) The minimal explanations of //get_gun ∧ goto_bank// are { // | ||
- | (c) Observing // | + | < |
- | However, you would still need to be able to explain it. This could be done by making // | + | However, you would still need to be able to explain it. This could be done by making // |
(d) { //banking// } and { //robbing// } . | (d) { //banking// } and { //robbing// } . | ||
(e) { // | (e) { // | ||
+ | |||
+ | ===== 5.9 ===== | ||
+ | |||
+ | The minimal conflicts are: { //d// } , { //e//, //g// } and { //h// }. | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | ===== 5.13 ===== | ||
+ | |||
+ | The general idea is to make the reliability of the source assumable. | ||
+ | |||
+ | (a) | ||
+ | < | ||
+ | a <- h & reliable_s_1. | ||
+ | d <- c & reliable_s_1. | ||
+ | |||
+ | e <- d & reliable_s_2. | ||
+ | f <- k & reliable_s_2. | ||
+ | z <- g & reliable_s_2. | ||
+ | j <- reliable_s_2. | ||
+ | |||
+ | h <- d & reliable_s_3. | ||
+ | |||
+ | a <- b & e & reliable_s_4. | ||
+ | b <- c & reliable_s_4. | ||
+ | |||
+ | g <- f & j & reliable_s_5. | ||
+ | |||
+ | false <- a & z. | ||
+ | c. | ||
+ | k. | ||
+ | |||
+ | assumable reliable_s_1. | ||
+ | assumable reliable_s_2. | ||
+ | assumable reliable_s_3. | ||
+ | assumable reliable_s_4. | ||
+ | assumable reliable_s_5. | ||
+ | |||
+ | % Try: | ||
+ | % ask false. | ||
+ | </ | ||
+ | |||
+ | (b) There are two minimal conflicts: \\ | ||
+ | [ // | ||
+ | and \\ | ||
+ | [ // | ||
+ | |||
+ | < | ||
+ | |||
+ | (d) The only pair of sources that could account for the contradiction are those obtained by pairing the elements of the two conflicts that are not in the intersection of the conflicts. This means that there is one such pair { // | ||
+ | |||
+ |