scholarly journals On the Best Accuracy Arguments for Probabilism

2022 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Michael Nielsen
Keyword(s):  
Correct Proof

Abstract In a recent paper, Pettigrew (2021) reports a generalization of the celebrated accuracy-dominance theorem due to Predd et al. (2009). But Pettigrew’s proof is incorrect. I will explain the mistakes and provide a correct proof.

scholarly journals Corrigendum to secret sharing on infinite graphs

2010 ◽  
Vol 47 (1) ◽  
pp. 137-138
Author(s):  
László Csirmaz
Keyword(s):  
Secret Sharing ◽  
Infinite Graphs ◽  
Correct Proof

Abstract The proof of Claim 6.8 in the Appendix of [L. Csirmaz: Secret sharing on infinite graphs, Tatra Mt. Math. Publ. 41 (2008), 1-18] is incorrect. Here we give a new (and hopefully correct) proof.

Note on a paper in tense logic

1969 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 215-218 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. A. Bull
Keyword(s):  
Tense Logic ◽  
Finite Model ◽  
Model Property ◽  
Ordered Sets ◽  
Finite Model Property ◽  
Finite Models ◽  
Correct Proof

In [1, §4], my ‘proof’ that GH1 has the finite model property is incorrect; there are considerable obscurities towards the end of §1, particularly on p. 33; and I should have exhibited the finite models for GH1. In §1 of this paper I expand the analysis of the sub-directly irreducible models for GH1 which I give in §1 of [1]. In §2 I give a correct proof that GH1 has the finite model property. In §3 I exhibit these finite models as models on certain ordered sets.

scholarly journals A NOTE ON “ON CIPHERTEXT UNDETECTABILITY”

2013 ◽  
Vol 57 (1) ◽  
pp. 119-121
Author(s):  
Angsuman Das ◽  
Avishek Adhikari
Keyword(s):  
Slight Modification ◽  
Encryption Scheme ◽  
Correct Proof ◽  
The Relationship

ABSTRACT The notion of ciphertext undetectability was introduced in [Gaˇzi, P. - Stanek, M.: On ciphertext undetectability, Tatra Mt. Math. Publ. 41 (2008), 133-151] as a steganographic property of an encryption scheme. While finding the relationship between ciphertext undetectability and indistinguishability of encryptions, authors showed that ciphertext undetectability does not imply indistinguishability. Though the proposition is correct, the proof is not. In this note, we provide a correct proof of the above-mentioned result by a slight modification of the construction used in original paper cited above.

Classification of Invariant Algebraic Curves and Nonexistence of Algebraic Limit Cycles in Quadratic Systems from Family (I) of the Chinese Classification

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (04) ◽  
pp. 2050056 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria V. Demina ◽  
Claudia Valls
Keyword(s):  
Differential System ◽  
Limit Cycles ◽  
Algebraic Curves ◽  
Complete Classification ◽  
Quadratic Systems ◽  
Correct Proof ◽  
Invariant Algebraic Curves ◽  
Algebraic Limit Cycles ◽  
Algebraic Limit

We give the complete classification of irreducible invariant algebraic curves in quadratic systems from family [Formula: see text] of the Chinese classification, that is, of differential system [Formula: see text] with [Formula: see text]. In addition, we provide a complete and correct proof of the nonexistence of algebraic limit cycles for these equations.

scholarly journals ON A THEOREM OF KANG AND LIU ON FACTORISED GROUPS

2017 ◽  
Vol 97 (1) ◽  
pp. 54-56
Author(s):  
A. BALLESTER-BOLINCHES ◽  
M. C. PEDRAZA-AGUILERA
Keyword(s):  
Finite Groups ◽  
Supersoluble Groups ◽  
Correct Proof

Kang and Liu [‘On supersolvability of factorized finite groups’, Bull. Math. Sci.3 (2013), 205–210] investigate the structure of finite groups that are products of two supersoluble groups. The goal of this note is to give a correct proof of their main theorem.

scholarly journals On the two-dimensional sloshing problem

2011 ◽  
Vol 467 (2132) ◽  
pp. 2427-2430 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vladimir Kozlov ◽  
Nikolay Kuznetsov ◽  
Oleg Motygin
Keyword(s):  
Stream Function ◽  
Two Dimensional ◽  
Correct Proof

A correct proof is given for the following assertions about the two-dimensional sloshing problem. The fundamental eigenvalue is simple and the corresponding stream function may be chosen to be non-negative in the closure of the water domain. New proof is based on stricter assumptions about the water domain; namely, it must satisfy John’s condition.

scholarly journals Note on a paper of Tsuzuku

1964 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 196-197
Author(s):  
H. K. Farahat
Keyword(s):  
Symmetric Group ◽  
Commutative Ring ◽  
Permutation Group ◽  
Matrix Representation ◽  
Invertible Element ◽  
Unit Element ◽  
Transitive Permutation Group ◽  
Natural Representation ◽  
Correct Proof ◽  
Permutation Matrices

In [2], Tosiro Tsuzzuku gave a proof of the following:THEOREM. Let G be a doubly transitive permutation group of degree n, let K be any commutative ring with unit element and let p be the natural representation of G by n × n permutation matrices with elements 0, 1 in K. Then ρ is decomposable as a matrix representation over K if and only ifn is an invertible element of K.For G the symmetric group this result follows from Theorems (2.1) and (4.12) of [1]. The proof given by Tsuzuku is unsatisfactory, although it is perfectly valid when K is a field. The purpose of this note is to give a correct proof of the general case.

scholarly journals Four Variables Suffice

2007 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alasdair Urquhart
Keyword(s):  
Opposite Direction ◽  
Basic Problem ◽  
Correct Proof ◽  
Relevant Logics ◽  
New Form

What I wish to propose in the present paper is a new form of “career induction” for ambitious young logicians. The basic problem is this: if we look at the n-variable fragments of relevant propositional logics, at what point does undecidability begin? Focus, to be definite, on the logic R. John Slaney showed that the 0-variable fragment of R (where we allow the sentential con- stants t and f) contains exactly 3088 non-equivalent propositions, and so is clearly decidable. In the opposite direction, I claimed in my paper of 1984 that the five variable fragment of R is undecidable. The proof given there was sketchy (to put the matter charitably), and a close examination reveals that although the result claimed is true, the proof given is incorrect. In the present paper, I give a detailed and (I hope) correct proof that the four variable fragments of the principal relevant logics are undecidable. This leaves open the question of the decidability of the n-variable fragments for n = 1, 2, 3. At what point does undecidability set in?

scholarly journals Comments on “An Initial Study on the Relationship Between Meta Features of Dataset and the Initialization of NNRW”

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Weipeng Cao
Keyword(s):  
Gamma Distribution ◽  
Initial Study ◽  
Good Choice ◽  
Typographical Error ◽  
Conference Paper ◽  
Correct Proof ◽  
The Relationship

<p>This paper comments on our recently published conference paper entitled "An Initial Study on the Relationship Between Meta Features of Dataset and the Initialization of NNRW".</p> We point out that the above-mentioned article has a typographical error in proving that using Gamma distribution to initialize NNRW is not a good choice, and give the corresponding correct proof.

scholarly journals Kemampuan Mengkonstruksi Bukti Geometri Mahasiswa Calon Guru Matematika Pada Perkuliahan Geometri

Jurnal Elemen ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 211-227
Author(s):  
Samsul Maarif ◽  
◽  
Wahyudin Wahyudin ◽  
Fiti Alyani ◽  
Trisna Roy Pradipta ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Method ◽  
Initial Step ◽  
Mathematics Students ◽  
Flow Process ◽  
Correct Proof ◽  
Qualitative Descriptive ◽  
Valid Evidence ◽  
Descriptive Method ◽  
Descriptive Qualitative

This study aims to analyze and describe the ability to construct proofs of perspective teacher mathematics students in basic geometrical lectures on the concepts of alignment, triangles, and concordance of two triangles. This research uses a descriptive qualitative method involving 35 prospective mathematics students at the Universitas PGRI Semarang. This study uses a qualitative descriptive method involving 35 students. The results of this study show that: (1) 28% of students sketched diagrams and used geometric labels appropriately on the constructed evidence; (2) 28.57% of students have the correct initial step of proof; (3) 28.57% of students can determine the exact conjecture that leads to the correct proof; (4) 25.71% of students are correct in compiling proof arguments by the correct postulate and theorem; (5) 25.71% of the thought flow process used by coherent students leads to valid evidence; and (6) 22.86% of students mastered theorems and concepts used in compiling constructing proof.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document