Improved Descriptional Complexity Results on Generalized Forbidding Grammars

Author(s):  
Henning Fernau ◽  
Lakshmanan Kuppusamy ◽  
Rufus O. Oladele ◽  
Indhumathi Raman
Author(s):  
Henning Fernau ◽  
Lakshmanan Kuppusamy ◽  
Rufus O. Oladele ◽  
Indhumathi Raman

2021 ◽  
Vol 181 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 189-211
Author(s):  
Henning Fernau ◽  
Lakshmanan Kuppusamy ◽  
Rufus O. Oladele ◽  
Indhumathi Raman

A simple semi-conditional (SSC) grammar is a form of regulated rewriting system where the derivations are controlled either by a permitting string alone or by a forbidden string alone and this condition is specified in the rule. The maximum length i (j, resp.) of the permitting (forbidden, resp.) strings serves as a measure of descriptional complexity known as the degree of such grammars. In addition to the degree, the numbers of nonterminals and of conditional rules are also counted into the descriptional complexity measures of these grammars. We improve on some previously obtained results on the computational completeness of SSC grammars by minimizing the number of nonterminals and / or the number of conditional rules for a given degree (i, j). More specifically we prove, using a refined analysis of a normal form for type-0 grammars due to Geffert, that every recursively enumerable language is generated by an SSC grammar of (i) degree (2, 1) with eight conditional rules and nine nonterminals, (ii) degree (3, 1) with seven conditional rules and seven nonterminals (iii) degree (4, 1) with six conditional rules and seven nonterminals and (iv) degree (4, 1) with eight conditional rules and six nonterminals.


Author(s):  
Garrett Cullity

Three things often recognized as central to morality are concern for others’ welfare, respect for their self-expression, and cooperation in worthwhile collective activity. When philosophers have proposed theories of the substance of morality, they have typically looked to one of these three sources to provide a single, fundamental principle of morality—or they have tried to formulate a master-principle for morality that combines these three ideas in some way. This book views them instead as three independently important foundations of morality. It sets out a plural-foundation moral theory with affinities to that of W. D. Ross. There are major differences: the account of the foundations of morality differs from Ross’s, and there is a more elaborate explanation of how the rest of morality derives from them. However, the overall aim is similar. This is to illuminate the structure of morality by showing how its complex content is generated from a relatively simple set of underlying elements—the complexity results from the various ways in which one part of morality can derive from another, and the various ways in which the derived parts of morality can interact. Plural-foundation moral theories are sometimes criticized for having nothing helpful to say about cases in which their fundamental norms conflict. Responding to this, the book concludes with three detailed applications of the theory: to the questions surrounding paternalism, the use of others as means, and our moral responsibilities as consumers.


Author(s):  
Cai-Xia Wang ◽  
Yu Yang ◽  
Hong-Juan Wang ◽  
Shou-Jun Xu
Keyword(s):  

1994 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 122-123 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael T. Hallett ◽  
H. Todd Wareham

2011 ◽  
Vol 38 ◽  
pp. 463-468
Author(s):  
Hervé Hocquard ◽  
Pascal Ochem ◽  
Petru Valicov

Author(s):  
Björn Lellmann ◽  
Francesca Gulisano ◽  
Agata Ciabattoni

Abstract Over the course of more than two millennia the philosophical school of Mīmāṃsā has thoroughly analyzed normative statements. In this paper we approach a formalization of the deontic system which is applied but never explicitly discussed in Mīmāṃsā to resolve conflicts between deontic statements by giving preference to the more specific ones. We first extend with prohibitions and recommendations the non-normal deontic logic extracted in Ciabattoni et al. (in: TABLEAUX 2015, volume 9323 of LNCS, Springer, 2015) from Mīmāṃsā texts, obtaining a multimodal dyadic version of the deontic logic $$\mathsf {MD}$$ MD . Sequent calculus is then used to close a set of prima-facie injunctions under a restricted form of monotonicity, using specificity to avoid conflicts. We establish decidability and complexity results, and investigate the potential use of the resulting system for Mīmāṃsā philosophy and, more generally, for the formal interpretation of normative statements.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document