Relations Between Concepts
- Finite thickness implies finite elasticity; the converse is not true.
- Finite elasticity and conservatively learnable implies the existence of a mind change bound.
- Finite elasticity and M-finite thickness implies the existence of a mind change bound. However, M-finite thickness alone does not imply the existence of a mind change bound; neither does the existence of a mind change bound imply M-finite thickness.
- Existence of a mind change bound implies learnability; the converse is not true.
- If we allow for noncomputable learners, then finite elasticity implies the existence of a mind change bound; the converse is not true.
- If there is no accumulation order for a class of languages, then there is a language (not necessarily in the class) that has infinite cross property within the class, which in turn implies infinite elasticity of the class.
Read more about this topic: Language Identification In The Limit
Famous quotes containing the words relations and/or concepts:
“I want relations which are not purely personal, based on purely personal qualities; but relations based upon some unanimous accord in truth or belief, and a harmony of purpose, rather than of personality. I am weary of personality.... Let us be easy and impersonal, not forever fingering over our own souls, and the souls of our acquaintances, but trying to create a new life, a new common life, a new complete tree of life from the roots that are within us.”
—D.H. (David Herbert)
“Germany collapsed as a result of having engaged in a struggle for empire with the concepts of provincial politics.”
—Albert Camus (1913–1960)