Talk:Logic in computer science

Computing High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Philosophy: Logic High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Logic

I can live with this article in its present form. But I can't find any policy that says that you can't link outside the main namespace. It does make sense that you wouldn't link to the Wikipedia or Help namespaces, because those aren't part of the reference. But Category? If I'm wrong, please point me to the policy I'm wrong about. ---Isaac R 18:35, 20 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It's not exactly policy, but the reason for it is given in Wikipedia:Avoid self-references. In this case you were linking to a category that was already on the page because it appears in the category in the usual way; thus the link was duplicate as well as breaking those syndicates of WP that do not use the categories namespace. --- Charles Stewart 18:54, 20 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Organisation of this article

In my opinion, the description of the kind of topics we have should be as concise as possible, so that it is useful as a definition of what logic in computer science. As it stands, it does not serve this purpose. I propose that we start a structured List of logic in computer science topics that covers all of the articles that we judge to fall under this heading, and then try to distill down the current list of topics, perhaps changing the name to list of areas. --- Charles Stewart 16:54, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have added several topics that shouldn't be missing in an article about logic in cs. I agree that now (but probably already before) the article lacks a concise definition of logic in cs. However, I do not think that the article has to be necessarily split up. One possibility would to start with a concise general definition, and then list the various aspects in more detail. Tillmo 20:56, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty amateurish

This article is rather uneven in its coverage and seems rather too focused on AI. It fails to cover many other significant applications including almost everything related to computer programming, like type systems, formal verification (of programs), etc. Never mind finite model theory and its relation to computational complexity. 86.127.138.67 (talk) 02:24, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I see verfication is mentioned, but with KBSA as prime example. KBSA is a pretty obscure paper (~1xx citations), compared to say Hoare logic, which has some 5K citations. 86.127.138.67 (talk) 02:41, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The old version, before the rewrite by a certain self-proclaimed mad scientist, actually had a much better outline, albeit telegraphic. 86.127.138.67 (talk) 16:09, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Logic in computer science. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130424071228/http://www.cs.umd.edu/~golbeck/LBSC690/SemanticWeb.html to http://www.cs.umd.edu/~golbeck/LBSC690/SemanticWeb.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:20, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Logic in computer science. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051025052601/http://www.informatik.hu-berlin.de/lics/ to http://www.informatik.hu-berlin.de/lics/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:28, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If-then rules in production systems are not a subset of FOL

Production systems perform "conflict resolution" when more than one antecedent of a rule matches the current state of the working memory, and they destructively update the working memory by adding and retracting "data" expressed as "facts" in the database. Both of these features mean that production systems do not have a direct interpretation as systems of logic. See for example: Logic_programming#Relationship_with_the_Computational-representational_understanding_of_mind.

I suggest that the paragraph on if-then rules be deleted and be replaced by a paragraph on logic programming. Robert Kowalski (talk) 19:23, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a paragraph about logic programming. Hopefully, someone else will delete the paragraph about IF-THEN rules. Robert Kowalski (talk) 20:03, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]