【摘要】：本文認為文獻(van Ditmarsch et.al.,2007)對認知行動"讀"形式化時,語法與語義混淆,給出的語法和語義不夠直觀、自然。本文在形式化認知行動"讀"時,嚴格區(qū)分語法和語義,在形式上更直觀自然、更易理解;在此基礎上,給出讀邏輯RL的公理系統(tǒng),并證明其可靠性和完全性。另外,本文還對認知行動"讀"的量化進行研究,給出了這個量化邏輯AL的形式化。在表達力方面,本文還得到如下結(jié)果:(1)讀邏輯RL、公開宣告邏輯、認知邏輯以及單認知主體的任意讀邏輯AL表達力相等;(2)多認知主體的任意讀邏輯AL的表達力要嚴格大于認知邏輯、讀邏輯和公開宣告邏輯。
[Abstract]:This paper holds that when (van Ditmarsch et.al.,2007 is used to formalize cognitive action, grammar and semantics are confused, and the grammar and semantics given are not intuitive and natural. In this paper, when formalizing cognitive action "reading", grammar and semantics are strictly distinguished, which is more intuitive and natural in form and easier to understand. On this basis, the axiomatic system of reading logic RL is given, and its reliability and completeness are proved. In addition, this paper also studies the quantification of cognitive action "reading", and gives the formalization of this quantitative logic AL. In terms of expressive power, this paper also obtains the following results: (1) the public declarative logic of reading logic RL, cognitive logic and arbitrary reading logic AL of single cognitive subject are equal; (2) the expressive power of arbitrary reading logic AL of multi-cognitive subject is strictly greater than that of cognitive logic, reading logic and public declarative logic.
【作者單位】： 肇慶學院政法學院;
【基金】：教育部人文社會科學研究青年基金項目(11YJC72040001) 廣東省哲學社會科學“十二五”規(guī)劃青年項目(GD11YZX03)
【分類號】：B815.3

【相似文獻】

相關會議論文 前10條

1 邱志祥;岑溪南;王莉紅;歐晉平;王文生;李淵;尹s，

本文編號：2526015