The following links contains a Publication of a Paper regarding an actual Experiment. Despite some Drawbacks as to its academic and professional-research quality, it is based on an Actual Problem which we encountered during that experiment.
Abstract :
There were two methods of doing modular
transformations from Entity Relationship Diagrams to Class
Diagrams according to international researchers. In order to
establish which method would best suit software
engineers, we conducted a survey by giving a group of
students in the computer science field, whom we considered potential future software engineers. The results we got were valid, but did not match those of any of the international researchers. We found that this situation could only be explained using Eastern Four-Valued logic, also known by such names as Catuskoti and Tetralemma.
(11) A Discovery of the Relevance of Eastern Four-valued (Catuskoti) Logic to Define Modular Transformations When There are Multiple Ways of Representing the Same Modular Transformation. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/291810900_A_Discovery_of_the_Relevance_of_Eastern_Four-valued_Catuskoti_Logic_to_Define_Modular_Transformations_When_There_are_Multiple_Ways_of_Representing_the_Same_Modular_Transformation [accessed Jun 06 2018].
An excerpt : "
Quote 3:
Dr. Nalin De Silva, (who is a retired Professor and was the
former Dean of the Faculty of Science Kelaniya /
Vidyalankara University of Sri Lanka) who has a PhD in
Theoretical Cosmology (University of Su
ssex, UK.) had this to say regarding the failure of Aristotelian / Boolean Logic:
“However, the logic that is abstracted from
Aristotelian -Newtonian Experiences is not capable of
dealing with change in general and motion in particular. It is
demonstrated by the famous Zeno’s paradox that deals with
an arrow in motion. The Aristotelian logic is faced with
contradictions when it is employed to describe motion and
one would end up by showing that motion is impossible! The
Calculus of Newton and Leibniz, though their approaches
were not the same, tried to get over this difficulty using
infinitesimals intuitively without formally defining them.
However, infinitesimals were not liked by the western
Mathematicians and Philosophers and there were objections
to these "ghosts" by people such as Berkeley. Euler one of
the greatest western Mathematicians with an intuition that
surpassed most of the others freely used infinitesimals in his
formulation of Mathematical Analysis. However, as the
western Mathematicians did not like these infinitesimals that
according to Berkeley were neither finite nor not finite, later
Mathematicians Dedekind, Cantor and Cauchy "exorcised"
infinitesimals from Mathematical Analysis and introduced
what is known as the epsilon- delta definition
of limit, which is based on Aristotelian logic. The calculus that tried to deviate from Aristotelian logic at the beginning was brought back to an "arithmetical" definition based on that logic in the nineteenth century. It is interesting to note that some
thing similar is happening in Quantum Physics. Bohr (and
Heisenberg) who tried to deviate from the Classical Physics
world view in the thirties created what is known as the
Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Physics.
Copenhagen Interpretation was obviously not in agreement
with Aristotelian logic and the tendency at present is to
formulate a new interpretation based on Aristotelian logic
and doing away with Heisenberg’s uncertainty Principle.”
(11) A Discovery of the Relevance of Eastern Four-valued (Catuskoti) Logic to Define Modular Transformations When There are Multiple Ways of Representing the Same Modular Transformation. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/291810900_A_Discovery_of_the_Relevance_of_Eastern_Four-valued_Catuskoti_Logic_to_Define_Modular_Transformations_When_There_are_Multiple_Ways_of_Representing_the_Same_Modular_Transformation [accessed Jun 06 2018].
Actually, the current trend is towards a non-aristotelian multivalued logic grounded on the fact that the neocortex that supports our conceptual thinking processes is a neural network able to correlate any arbitrary number of parameters simmultaneously:
https://www.omicsonline.org/open-access/on-the-relation-between-the-comprehension-ability-and-the-neocortexverbal-areas-2155-6180-1000331.pdf
https://www.omicsonline.org/open-access/gravitation-quantum-mechanics-and-the-least-action-electromagneticequilibrium-states-2329-6542-1000152.pdf
Hello,
We now use nine level logic world wide, in communications, IEEE 1164, since 1993, and more. An IEEE International Symposium on Multiple-Valued Logic (ISMVL) is active1970. The real world needs truth tables with more than levels. Any local reduction is just a provincialism, that works against the ones who defend it.
Cheers, Ed Gerck
Many thanks Sir/Prof/Dr./ Ed Gerck,
Thank you Sir, for your Well thought out Reply.
However, as I remember I informed at the beginning that the Professional-Academic quality of the Publication might be low. As for the Experiment, it is one I can "Swear Upon", since this was done by me, using my own Computer Students as test subjects.
At the Beginning, (although the Hypotheses maybe Not Clearly defined), what I really wanted to test was that when you Transform ERD diagrams into Class Diagrams, which of the Two (02) methods already published (by 2011) were valid, or atleast more practical.
(A) Tran, T. N., Khan, K. M., & Lan, Y. -chen. (2004).
A framework for transforming artifacts from data flow diagrams to UML
(B) Terrence P. Fries " Myrtle Beach, SC, USA — October 18 - 20, 2006 "
Conference Paper A framework for transforming structured analysis and design ...
"A framework for transforming structured analysis and design artifacts to UML"
Although Publication (A) only mentions " data flow diagrams", they had also worked with Entity Relationship Diagrams (ERD) and transformed them into Class Diagrams.
What really surprised me was well over 140 of my students followed a Method, which was compatible Neither with the Class Diagram to ERD Transformation Method in publication (A) Nor with the Class Diagram to ERD Transformation Method in (B).
The Majority of the students had figured out a Transformation Method where they could Directly Transform Associative Entities (in ERDs) into Association Classes in Class Diagrams, which my Academic Research Supervisor / Advisor Mr. G.K.A. Dias also agreed, was a Valid Class Diagram to ERD Transformation Method.
Loving Kindness and Best Regards,
Ravi Madanayake,
Employee And Student at the University of Colombo School of Computing.
Ravi Madanayake - unfortunately you start by assuming that there are two method sthat cove the space of methods and they are logically inconsistent with one another. Call the propositions um1 and um2 for use method 1 and use method 2. You assume um1 & m2 = false and um1 = ~um2. If you drop this assumption and regard um1 and um2 are independent at the beginning of the experiment which gives 4 values of result for the experiment.
I should say I have nothing against non Boolean logics and would recommend, for example, reading Belnap on 4 valued logic. Just for interest sake I will also point to Bells “A Primer of Infinitesimal Analysis” as a nice introduction to what happens when you use intuitionistic logic to do analaysis - yo get infinitesimals back!
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Human-Computer Interaction
- Collaboration