Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

Re: Motion 52: final "Expressions" text for vote

Bill
I agree with Vladik. At least for set based intervals we have closedness for all operations. A NaN or NaI can only occur by an illegal explicit constructor call. And an exception closes this trapdoor. 
Jürgen


Am 23.11.2013 05:04, schrieb Kreinovich, Vladik:

For intervals proper, the defiition is the same always, f([x1],...,[xn]) is the smallest interval that contains the range of the given function f(x1,...,xn) on given intervals [x1], ..., [xn], i.e., the set of all the values
{f(x1,...,xn):x1 is in [x1], ..., xn is in [xn]}.

The questions arise when we want to extend this to situations when [xi] are not intervals

(there are also definitions for decorations)

________________________________________
From: Bill Walster [billwalster@xxxxxxxxx] on behalf of G. William (Bill) Walster [bill@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, November 22, 2013 2:31 PM
To: Kreinovich, Vladik; Michel Hack; stds-1788
Subject: Re: Motion 52: final "Expressions" text for vote

Vladik,

Then please point me to the purely mathematical foundation for computing
with "well defined" intervals.

Cheers,

Bill



--
o Prof. Dr. Juergen Wolff von Gudenberg, Lehrstuhl fuer Informatik II 
    / \          Universitaet Wuerzburg, Am Hubland, D-97074 Wuerzburg
InfoII o         Tel.: +49 931 / 31 86602
  / \  Uni       E-Mail: wolff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
 o   o Wuerzburg