Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Instead the theory contends that an analogy alerts the hearer to a similarity in the relationships between objects in a domain. The distinction is made in terms of the arity of predicates - attributes are predicates with one argument, while relationships are predicates which take two or more arguments.
The objects that are related via the association are considered to act in a role with respect to the association, if object's current state in the active situation allows the other associated objects to use the object in the manner specified by the role. A role can be used to distinguish two objects of the same class when describing its use in ...
An analogy can be stated using is to and as when representing the analogous relationship between two pairs of expressions, for example, "Smile is to mouth, as wink is to eye." In the field of mathematics and logic, this can be formalized with colon notation to represent the relationships, using single colon for ratio, and double colon for equality.
A simple type of analogy is one that is based on shared properties; [1] [2] and analogizing is the process of representing information about a particular subject (the analogue or source system) by another particular subject (the target system), [3] in order "to illustrate some particular aspect (or clarify selected attributes) of the primary domain".
Breakdown of objects into geons. The recognition-by-components theory, or RBC theory, [1] is a process proposed by Irving Biederman in 1987 to explain object recognition. According to RBC theory, we are able to recognize objects by separating them into geons (the object's main component parts). Biederman suggested that geons are based on basic ...
This facet of word2vec has been exploited in a variety of other contexts. For example, word2vec has been used to map a vector space of words in one language to a vector space constructed from another language. Relationships between translated words in both spaces can be used to assist with machine translation of new words. [27]
Relational analogies are opposite from formal analogies. Instead of just drawing the conclusions, one must prove the relationship, and both sides of the analogy are studied and a relationship must be demonstrated between the ethnographic object and the archaeological object.
These subcategories are subject to certain formal properties including the requirement that any surjection is an epimorphism. A projective object (relative to the fixed class of surjections) is then an object P so that Hom(P, −) turns the fixed class of surjections (as opposed to all epimorphisms) into surjections of sets (in the usual sense).