Yes.
It is also important to remember that both FTIA and FTDIA are theories.
As such, all they do is make *predictions* about the result of an
interval expression. Neither actually *compute* anything. So even though
they are necessary, they are not enough for a standard.
For FTIA, this is why P1788 passed Motion 5, which provides interval
arithmetic operations to compute range enclosures consistent with FTIA.
For FTDIA, this is why P1788 should pass Motion 25, which provides the
necessary operations to compute decorations consistent with FTDIA.
As I've indicated in my friendly amendment to Motion 25, we have every
reason to believe John and Arnold will find the proof.
Nate
----- Original Message ----- From: "Dominique Lohez"
<dominique.lohez@xxxxxxx>
To: "Jürgen Wolff von Gudenberg" <wolff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "stds-1788" <stds-1788@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, June 03, 2011 5:17 AM
Subject: Re: Amendment to property tracking
Jürgen Wolff von Gudenberg a écrit :
I would like to raise the question:
"Do we really need an FTDIA ?"
or is an FTIA sufficient?
Yes, we need FTDIA The meaning of the theorem is to fulfill the precept
Thou shalt not lie
For the interval width , this leads to FTIA
For decorations this leads yo FTDIA
IMHO Interval arithmetic and Decoration Calculations must not be dealt
with separately
Regards
Dominique
Then, we would have do define how an algorithm can be performed on
bare decoratiións. But that may be simpler
Juergen
--
Dr Dominique LOHEZ
ISEN
41, Bd Vauban
F59046 LILLE
France
Phone : +33 (0)3 20 30 40 71
Email: Dominique.Lohez@xxxxxxx