Talk:Method of analytic tableaux

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I know tableaux as semantic tableaux, and in fact, the page Semantic tableau redirects here. Is there a difference?

Not all tableau systems are analytic. This article could be generalized to include non-analytic systems. Nortexoid 20:48, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Editing

This article isn't written very clearly. There is a lot of unnecessary terminology (e.g. 'multisets', 'sibling', 'child', etc.) that is left unexplained (e.g. 'branch', 'node', etc.). The article should be relatively brief and introductory. Am I the only one that finds it a disgusting mess?

Also, the title of the article should be something like 'Semantic tableau(x)' since there are tableau methods with cut rules. Nortexoid 01:26, 22 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Specific things to be cited

  • "Clearly, we would prefer to always find the shortest closed tableaux but it can be shown that one single algorithm that finds the shortest closed tableaux for all input sets of formulae cannot exist." —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bayle Shanks (talkcontribs) 22:01, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Possible Plagarism

This article looks like it might be ripe for plagarism accusation, I've read a few things on the page (for example "if σ is the most general unifier of two literals A and B, where A and the negation of B occurr in the same branch of the tableau, σ can be applied at the same time to all formulae of the tableau") that look like they have been copied verbatim from Melvin Fitting's book. His book is no doubt a good resource, and should be paraphrased (and perhaps his book elevated to the top of the list), but having chapter 6 and 7 from his book be a majority of the basis for the article is kind of sketchy.

Kmicinski 23:10, 5 January 2007 (UTC) Kristopher Micinski

Such an accusation would be groundless. No sentence has been directly lifted from Fittin's book, nor is any paragraph/section a direct sentence-by-sentence rephrasing from it. Referring to your example, what Fitting says is "Suppose T is a tableau [...], and some branch of T contains A and -B, where A and B are atomic. Then T\sigma is also a tableau ..." Not quite the same sentence I wrote. If you have other examples, please cite page and line numbers. Tizio 15:16, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
I'm not accusing you of anything, I've just noticed a simmilarity and thought that a few sentences might be possible plagarism. It's only a small portion of the article. Sorry about it, it just looked a lot like the material. I'll try to rework any more I see. I'll pull it from the copyright category. 207.210.205.28 23:00, 7 January 2007 (UTC)Kris Micinski
Thanks for clarifying. Of course, if you see that some sentences I wrote turned out to be too similar to some in Fitting's book (or some other sources), feel free to rephrase. Tizio 12:55, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Terminology

The method is usually called (Semantic or Analytic) Tableaux (from French?) as the Title also indicates. In the body of the page though it is called Tableau. Should that be updated? DRap 09:09, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, the word originally entered English via French. "Tableaux" is plural (in both English and French, "Tableaus" is an alternative English plural, but rarely used, and, to my knowledge, never in this context), "Tableau" is singular. To add to the confusion, to my German ear, they both sound exactly the same ;-). --Stephan Schulz 09:20, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Yes, perhaps we could clarify? You will often see in the article 'a tableau' and this should be made distinct from 'the tableaux' (is the 'x' silent?). I have seen it reffered to both as semantic tableaux and tableau, but don't which would be more appropriate here 207.210.205.28 04:32, 16 January 2007 (UTC) Kris Micinski