Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
Dear Juergen and list members, Please read the inserted comments Best regards Dominique .J. Wolff v. Gudenberg a écrit :
Dear all, I support the structure laid out in the position paper. I am however not sure how much details are reasonable in levels 3 and 4. But let us start with level 1In table 2 the underlying number system \curly{R} and intervals built from this \curly{IR} is found The \curly{I} operator is not defined, hence implicitly, I assume it is by building pairs. We should allow for more flexibility here, as is done in Kulisch's Dagstuhl publication.The current text of the position paper suggests the following options1. if \curly{R} = \R \IR means the set of all bounded closed intervals2. if \curly{R} = \R* = \R u {-infty,+infty}\IR* = *\IR (see notation paper) means the set of all bounded closed intervals over \R*, i.e. +- infty may be member of an intervalKulisch proposes: 3. (IR) denoting the set of all closed and connected intervalsif bounds are infinite, they do not belong to the interval, hence [infty, infty] is not possibleOn the other hand we could propose4. IR to be the same set as in 2. but without infinite point intervals.I propose to amend the motion by adding the specification of the \curly{I} operator.with this the roadmap for further motions seems to be clear - decide on number system - decide on \curly{I} operator - specify operations alternative roadmap: - decide that intervals are sets - decide whether infty may be a member - decide on bounds representation. All the text I wrote does implicitly assume that low <= up in a (standard) interval [low,up] Non-standard intervals shall be dealt with later best regards Juergen
-- Dr Dominique LOHEZ ISEN 41, Bd Vauban F59046 LILLE France Phone : +33 (0)3 20 30 40 71 Email: Dominique.Lohez@xxxxxxx
Attachment:
LohezMEA13_11_2008.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document