[permalink] [id link]
Formally, we are given a set of hypotheses and a set of manifestations ; they are related by the domain knowledge, represented by a function that takes as an argument a set of hypotheses and gives as a result the corresponding set of manifestations.
Some Related Sentences
Formally and we
Formally, we start with a category C with finite products ( i. e. C has a terminal object 1 and any two objects of C have a product ).
Formally it is precisely in allowing quantification over class variables α, β, etc., that we assume a range of values for these variables to refer to.
Formally, we have for the approximation to the full solution A, a series in the small parameter ( here called ), like the following:
Formally, if we write F < sub > Δ </ sub >( x ) to mean the f-polynomial of Δ, then the h-polynomial of Δ is
Formally, for a countable set of events A < sub > 1 </ sub >, A < sub > 2 </ sub >, A < sub > 3 </ sub >, ..., we have
Formally, we begin by considering some family of distributions for a random variable X, that is indexed by some θ.
Formally, let A be a real matrix of which we want to compute the eigenvalues, and let A < sub > 0 </ sub >:= A.
Formally, an antihomomorphism between X and Y is a homomorphism, where equals Y as a set, but has multiplication reversed: denoting the multiplication on Y as and the multiplication on as, we have.
Formally, the definition only requires some invertibility, so we can substitute for Q any matrix M whose eigenvalues do not include − 1.
Formally, given a finite set X, a collection C of subsets of X, all of size n, has Property B if we can partition X into two disjoint subsets Y and Z such that every set in C meets both Y and Z.
Formally, we define a bad field as a structure of the form ( K, T ), where K is an algebraically closed field and T is an infinite, proper, distinguished subgroup of K, such that ( K, T ) is of finite Morley rank in its full language.
Formally, if we denote the set of stable functions by S ( D ) and the stability radius by r ( f, D ), then:
Formally and are
However, shortly after this positive result, Kurt Gödel published On Formally Undecidable Propositions of Principia Mathematica and Related Systems ( 1931 ), showing that in any sufficiently strong axiomatic system there are true statements which cannot be proved in the system.
Formally, as per the 2002 Memorandum of Understanding between the BSI and the United Kingdom Government, British Standards are defined as:
Formally speaking, a collation method typically defines a total order on a set of possible identifiers, called sort keys, which consequently produces a total preorder on the set of items of information ( items with the same identifier are not placed in any defined order ).
Formally, this sharing of dynamics is referred to as universality, and systems with precisely the same critical exponents are said to belong to the same universality class.
Limits and colimits in a category C are defined by means of diagrams in C. Formally, a diagram of type J in C is a functor from J to C:
Formally, collective noun forms such as “ a group of people ” are represented by second-order variables, or by first-order variables standing for sets ( which are well-defined objects in mathematics and logic ).
Formally, two variables are inversely proportional ( or varying inversely, or in inverse variation, or in inverse proportion or in reciprocal proportion ) if one of the variables is directly proportional with the multiplicative inverse ( reciprocal ) of the other, or equivalently if their product is a constant.
Formally, they are partial derivatives of the option price with respect to the independent variables ( technically, one Greek, gamma, is a partial derivative of another Greek, called delta ).
Formally, the word is applied to persons who are publicly accepted in a recognised capacity, such as professional employment, graduation from a course of study, etc., to give critical commentaries in one or any of a number of specific fields of public or private achievement or endeavour.
( Formally speaking, this then satisfies the premises of an axiom of well-founded induction, which asserts that these two conditions are sufficient for the proposition to hold for all x.
Formally, the outcomes Y < sub > i </ sub > are described as being Bernoulli-distributed data, where each outcome is determined by an unobserved probability p < sub > i </ sub > that is specific to the outcome at hand, but related to the explanatory variables.
Formally this approximation is founded on the variational principle, valid for Hamiltonians that are bounded from below.
Formally, an analytic function ƒ ( z ) of the real or complex variables z < sub > 1 </ sub >,…, z < sub > n </ sub > is transcendental if z < sub > 1 </ sub >, …, z < sub > n </ sub >, ƒ ( z ) are algebraically independent, i. e., if ƒ is transcendental over the field C ( z < sub > 1 </ sub >, …, z < sub > n </ sub >).
Formally most of these approaches are similar to an artificial neural network, as inputs to a node are summed up and the result serves as input to a sigmoid function, e. g., but proteins do often control gene expression in a synergistic, i. e. non-linear, way.
Formally, the sets of free and bound names of a process in π – calculus are defined inductively as follows.