Talk:Fluent (artificial intelligence)

The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

Philosophy: Logic Low‑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

Low

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

Associated task forces:
/
	Logic

I have written the article trying to avoid complications and trying to put together the different definitions of fluents in different formalisms. This caused some problems:

I have assumed that fluents are truth-valued for the sake of simplicity, but this is not always the case; I think the better solution is to add a separate paragraph rather than making the definition more general from the beginning;
I have used “the predicate $On(box,table)$ ... ”; this is of course not a predicate but a literal using that predicate. Is there any way to say something correct without introducing the complication “we use a predicate $On$ so that $On(box,table)$ ... ”?

Paolo Liberatore (Talk) 12:47, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]