Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Inductive reasoning refers to a variety of methods of reasoning in which broad generalizations or principles are derived from a set of observations. [1] [2] Unlike deductive reasoning (such as mathematical induction), where the conclusion is certain, given the premises are correct, inductive reasoning produces conclusions that are at best probable, given the evidence provided.
Mathematical induction can be informally illustrated by reference to the sequential effect of falling dominoes. [1] [2]Mathematical induction is a method for proving that a statement () is true for every natural number, that is, that the infinitely many cases (), (), (), (), … all hold.
For example, when predicting how a person will react to a situation, inductive reasoning can be employed based on how the person reacted previously in similar circumstances. It plays an equally central role in the sciences , which often start with many particular observations and then apply the process of generalization to arrive at a universal ...
Mathematical logic, also called 'logistic', 'symbolic logic', the 'algebra of logic', and, more recently, simply 'formal logic', is the set of logical theories elaborated in the course of the nineteenth century with the aid of an artificial notation and a rigorously deductive method. [5]
The definition of a formal proof is intended to capture the concept of proofs as written in the practice of mathematics. The soundness of this definition amounts to the belief that a published proof can, in principle, be converted into a formal proof. However, outside the field of automated proof assistants, this is rarely done in practice.
We begin with a famous example: All humans are mortal. All Greeks are humans. All Greeks are mortal. The reader can check that the premises and conclusion are true, but logic is concerned with inference: does the truth of the conclusion follow from that of the premises? The validity of an inference depends on the form of the inference.
Proof by exhaustion, also known as proof by cases, proof by case analysis, complete induction or the brute force method, is a method of mathematical proof in which the statement to be proved is split into a finite number of cases or sets of equivalent cases, and where each type of case is checked to see if the proposition in question holds. [1]
Most recursive definitions have two foundations: a base case (basis) and an inductive clause. The difference between a circular definition and a recursive definition is that a recursive definition must always have base cases, cases that satisfy the definition without being defined in terms of the definition itself, and that all other instances in the inductive clauses must be "smaller" in some ...