• Korean Journal of Logic
• /
• v.15 no.2
• /
• pp.251-272
• /
• 2012

Recently Professor Lee has suggested the analysis of the indicative conditional based on Sellars-Brandom's inferentialism. In this paper, I raise three questions. First, Professor Lee seems to misunderstand Sellars-Brandom in that he considers only the analytically valid arguments as materially valid inferences. Second, Professor Lee seems to misunderstand Sellars-Brandom in that whereas Sellars-Brandom talks about the common features of all kinds of conditionals including counterfactual conditionals, Professor Lee takes it as the analysis of the indicative conditional only. Third, either Professor Lee's analysis is incompatible with Sellars-Brandom inferentialism or his analysis is too general.

• Korean Journal of Logic
• /
• v.15 no.3
• /
• pp.347-375
• /
• 2012

In my article published in 2008, I offered an inferentialist account of indicative conditionals. In her recent paper, Professor Seawha Kim raises three objections. First, I misunderstand Sellars-Brandom in that I take only concept-constitutive inferences as materially valid inferences. Second, Sellars and Brandom talk about the common features of all kinds of conditionals including counterfactual conditionals, but I construe their view as the analysis of the indicative conditionals only. Third, either my analysis is incompatible with Sellars-Brandom inferentialism or my analysis is too general. In this paper I argue that Seawha Kim's objections are all based on insufficient understandings of Sellars's and Brandom's views. First, it is Sellars's view that materially valid inferences are restricted within concept-constitutive inferences. Second, neither Sellars nor Brandom proposes a specific theory about the indicative conditional. Instead, they argue for the expressive role of the conditional. What I accept from their views is this expressive role of the conditional. The detailed proposals about the indicative conditional in my aforementioned article are my own. Third, the differences among conditionals have no direct bearing on Sellars-Brandom inferentialism. In addition, the meaning and role of the conditional expression 'if-then' do not require more than what I have argued for it.

• Proceedings of the Korean Information Science Society Conference
• /
• 1998.10b
• /
• pp.588-590
• /
• 1998

현대 웹 기반의 시스템에 대한 개발이 활발하게 이루어지고 있으나 아직까지 등식 추론을 위한 시스템은 개발되어 있지 않다. 본 논문에서는 웹에서 동작하는 조건 등식 추론 시스템 구현에 대해서 기술하였다. 개발된 시스템은 조건 등식 추론이 가능하며, 완료 프로시저, 다양한 개서 전략, 다양한 순서와 방법등을 지원한다.

• Journal of the Korean School Mathematics Society
• /
• v.12 no.3
• /
• pp.307-317
• /
• 2009

Formally p$\rightarrow$q means that affirming p one implicitly affirms q and that denying q one implicitly denies p. Denying p or affirming q do not lead to certain conclusions. Middle school students can recognize practical implication p$\rightarrow$q is true whenever p is false, but they don't recognize theoretical implication p$\rightarrow$q is true whenever p is false. They have not assimilated intuitively the complete structure of implication. Thus they do not distinguish naturally between the uncertain conclusion which can be drawn by affirming p and the certain rejection of p which follows from the negation of q. Also they can not recognize the uncertain conclusion which can be drawn by negation of p. There is no significant difference between practical conditional statements, formal conditional statements and conditional Inferences in advanced mathematics students. But there is a significant difference between formal conditional inferences and specific conditional inferences with statement p$\rightarrow$q is true when p is false.

• Korean Journal of Logic
• /
• v.16 no.1
• /
• pp.87-115
• /
• 2013

In my previous article "The Uncontested Principle and Wonbae Choi's Objections", I argued that the validity of modus ponens (as a deductive inference) is compatible with the claim that the Uncontested Principle is controversial. In his recent paper "The Uncontested Principle and Modus Ponens", Wonbae Choi criticizes my view again by making the following three claims: First, even though I do not take an inference of the form 'If A then (probably) C. A. $\therefore$ C' as an instance of modus ponens, this form of inference can be taken to be such an instance. Second, there is no grammatical indicator which allows us to distinguish between an indicative conditional based on a deductive inference and an indicative conditional based on an inductive inference, so that inferences based on these conditionals should not be treated as different types of inferences. Third, if we allow an indicative conditional based on an inductive inference, we thereby violate the so-called 'principle of harmony', which any logical concept should preserve. In this paper, I reply that his criticisms are all implausible.

• Journal of Korean Society of Transportation
• /
• v.22 no.1 s.72
• /
• pp.73-82
• /
• 2004

신호 교차로에서 포화차두시간에 영향을 미치는 영향인자는 도로조건, 교통조건, 환경조건으로 분류된다. 이러한 요인들의 복합적인 관계가 포화차두시간에 영향을 미친다. 현재 포화교통류율은 이상적인 조건일 때의 포화차두시간을 산출하고, 이를 이용해서 기본 포화교통류율을 구하고, 여기에 좌 우회전, 차로폭, 경사, 중차량 보정계수을 고려함으로써 특정 차로군의 포화교통류율을 산정하고 있다. 포화차두시간에 영향을 미치는 인자들 중에서 정량적으로 나타내기 어려운 인자 즉, 퍼지적 성격을 가진 인자들은 고려하지 않고 있다. 따라서 본 연구에서는 퍼지 근사추론 방법을 이용하여 정성적 인자의 영향을 고려한 모형을 구축하였다. 모형의 입력자료는 강우조건과 주변밝기의 정도, 중차량 구성비의 언어적 표현를 사용하였다. 이러한 변수들에 대하여 설문조사를 통해서 퍼지집합의 멤버쉽함수를 설정하였으며. 이에 기초하여 교차로에서 각 조건별로 포화차두시간을 관측하였다. 이러한 현장 관측치를 바탕으로 퍼지 제어규칙을 설정하고 모형을 구축하였다. 모형의 평가는 추론치와 실측치를 비교함으로써 이루어 졌으며, 결정계수인 $R^2$와 평균절대오차(MAE)와 평균제곱오차(MSE)를 사용하여 분석한 결과 본 모형의 설명력이 높은 것으로 평가되었다. 본 연구의 과정에서 강우에 의한 교통용량 감소는 중차량 구성비가 클수록 주변밝기의 정도가 나쁠수록 더욱 큰 것으로 나타났으며 그 감소율은 5.3%에서 21.8%에 이르는 넓은 범위의 값을 보였고. 주변밝기 정도에 따른 교통용량 감소는 4.7$\sim$7.5% 수준으로 나타났다.

• Korean Journal of Logic
• /
• v.17 no.1
• /
• pp.197-217
• /
• 2014

In my previous papers, I have argued that the so-called 'Uncontested Principle' does not hold for indicative conditionals based on inductive reasoning. This is mainly because if we accept that a material conditional '$A{\supset}C$' can be inferred from an indicative conditional based on inductive reasoning '$A{\rightarrow}_iC$', we get an absurd consequence such that we cannot distinguish between claiming 'C' to be probably true and claiming 'C' to be absolutely true on the assumption 'A'. However, in his recent paper "Uncontested Principle and Inductive Argument", Eunsuk Yang objects that my argument is unsuccessful in disputing the Uncontested Principle. In this paper, I show that his objections are irrelevant to my argument against the Uncontested Principle.

• Proceedings of the KIEE Conference
• /
• 1998.07a
• /
• pp.359-361
• /
• 1998

본 연구에서는 시스템의 대규모 SCADA 시스템들에 효과적으로 적용될 수 있는 전문가 시스템을 설계한다. 전문가 시스템의 추론기관은 직관적 추론 기능과 논리적 추론기능이 연동되도록 설계한다. 직관적 추론기능은 패턴인식구조로, 논리적 추론기능은 휴리스틱에 근거한 심층추론을 통해 시스템 이벤트별로 다양한 시간제야조건을 만족하는 시스템 제어전략을 결정함과 동시에, 지식 생성자의 역할을 할 수 있도록 다중 추론구조로 설계한다.

• Journal of the Korean Institute of Intelligent Systems
• /
• v.5 no.4
• /
• pp.18-32
• /
• 1995

Fuzzy rules, developed by experts thus far, may be often inconsistent and incomplete. This paper proposes a new methodology for automatic generation of fuzzy rules which are nearly complete and not inconsistent. This is accomplished by simulating a knowledge gathering process of humans from control experiences. This method is simpler and more efficient than existing ones. It is shown through simulation that our method even generates better rules than those generated by experts, under fine tuned parameters.

• Journal of the Korea Society of Computer and Information
• /
• v.16 no.1
• /
• pp.71-80
• /
• 2011

This paper provides a novel approach for developers to use face detection techniques for their applications easily without special knowledge by selecting optimal face detection algorithms based on fuzzy inference. The purpose of this paper is to come up with a high-level system for face detection based on fuzzy inference with which users can develop systems easily and even without specific knowledge on face detection theories and algorithms. Important conditions are firstly considered to categorize the large problem space of face detection. The conditions identified here are then represented as expressions so that developers can use them to express various problems. The expressed conditions and available face detection algorithms constitute the fuzzy inference rules and the Fuzzy Interpreter is constructed based on the rules. Once the conditions are expressed by developers, the Fuzzy Interpreter proposed take the role to inference the conditions and find and organize the optimal algorithms to solve the represented problem with corresponding conditions. A proof-of-concept is implemented and tested compared to conventional algorithms to show the performance of the proposed approach.