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

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

P-1788,

Can the issues that are being discussed regarding Motion 52 be
resolved to peoples' satisfaction within a week or so?

Baker

On 11/23/2013 04:05 AM, Jürgen Wolff von Gudenberg wrote:

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






--

---------------------------------------------------------------
R. Baker Kearfott,    rbk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx   (337) 482-5346 (fax)
(337) 482-5270 (work)                     (337) 993-1827 (home)
URL: http://interval.louisiana.edu/kearfott.html
Department of Mathematics, University of Louisiana at Lafayette
(Room 217 Maxim D. Doucet Hall, 1403 Johnston Street)
Box 4-1010, Lafayette, LA 70504-1010, USA
---------------------------------------------------------------