• 제목/요약/키워드: Mereology

검색결과 3건 처리시간 0.019초

Controlling robot formations by means of spatial reasoning based on rough mereology

  • Zmudzinski, Lukasz;Polkowski, Lech;Artiemjew, Piotr
    • Advances in robotics research
    • /
    • 제2권3호
    • /
    • pp.219-236
    • /
    • 2018
  • This research focuses on controlling robots and their formations using rough mereology as a means for spatial reasoning. The authors present the state of the art theory behind path planning, robot cooperation domains and ways of creating robot formations. Furthermore, the theory behind Rough Mereology as a way of implementing mereological potential field based path creation and navigation for single and multiple robots is described. An implementation of the algorithm is shown in simulation using RoboSim simulator. Five formations are tested (Line, Rhomboid, Snake, Circle, Cross) along with three decision systems (First In, Leader First, Horde Mode) as compared to other methods.

논리학의 존재론적 보수성과 부분전체론 (The Ontological Conservativeness of Logic and Mereology)

  • 강수휘
    • 논리연구
    • /
    • 제13권2호
    • /
    • pp.167-201
    • /
    • 2010
  • 본 논문의 목적은 철학적으로 만족스러운 메타논리학으로서 부분전체론의 가능성을 살펴보는 것이다. 그 이유는 명백하다. 소위 수리 논리학으로 알려진 메타논리학에 대한 전통적인 접근은 집합들, 함수들, 모형들과 같은 수학적 존재자들의 존재를 미리 상정하고 있다. 이는 우리가 논리학을 개별 과학 분야에 적용할 때마다, 이러한 집합론적 메타논리학이 이들 분야의 논의영역에 언제나 이들 특수한 존재자들을 부가한다는 것을 의미한다. 이러한 사실은 집합론적 메타논리학이 논리학의 존재론적 보수성과 상충한다는 것을 보여준다. 반면에 집합론과 유사한 형식 체계인 부분전체론은 존재론적으로 무고하다고 주장되어 왔다. 따라서 우리가 논리학의 존재론적 보수성을 보장할 수 있는 중립적인 메타논리학으로 이 부분전체론을 고려하는 것은 상당히 자연스러운 일일 것이다. 하지만 부분전체론의 존재론적 무고함을 주장하는 논변들을 살펴보면, 우리는 부분전체론적 합 혹은 융합체와 같은 부분전체론적 존재자들이 존재론적으로 중립적인, 무고한 존재자가 아니라는 것을 알게 된다. 결국 우리는 부분전체론을 통한 메타논리학 역시도 논리학의 기초로서 올바른 접근이 될 수 없다고 결론 내리게 된다.

  • PDF

하도(河圖)와 러셀 역설 (Hado and Russell's Paradox)

  • 김병수
    • 동의생리병리학회지
    • /
    • 제21권3호
    • /
    • pp.583-590
    • /
    • 2007
  • The significance of Han medicine (韓醫學), the Korean traditional medicine, that has lasted throughout the past couple millenniums relies upon Han Philosophy distinguished by its uniqueness. In brief, the specificity of Han medicine is characterized by unity of spirit and body, part and whole. According to this theory, when curing a frozen shoulder, it is usually cured by acupuncturing the area around the part that aches, but also doing so on the area that is totally different from the aching part such as the opposite part of the body. In fact, this can be pursued only through aspects that enable one to realize the unity of part and whole, and a ground for this possibility bases upon the crux of Eastern Philosophy, I-ching(역), such as theory of Five Elements (음양오행) and Three Pillars(삼재). In Western set theory, the issues of Class(부류) and elements(요원), whole and part were independently discussed in the area of mereology, and the question of part and whole was encountered with aporia and paradox since Greek ancient philosophy. At the turn of this century, many philosophers endeavored to pursue academic inquiry to resolve this paradox, especially by Russell and Whitehead through ${\ll}$Principia Mathematica${\gg}$ at the beginning of this century. in the process, there came out a phrase 'Russell's Paradox'. Russell himself proposed a typological resolution as an answer to the inquiry. However, 'Russell's Paradox' still remains as an aporia even till present days. During medieval period, this inquiry was even considered as 'insolubia'. Throughout this paper, 1 attempt to provide an analytic aspect on 'Russell's Paradox' from an unique thinking method and perspective of Han medicine that embodies the concept of 'unity of part and whole'. To do so, 1 suggest a physiological model in the first place depicted by diagrams of Circle 원, Quadrangle 방, Triangle 각(CQT) that portray the logic of Hado or Hotu 하도 which is 'the pattern from the river Ho'. That is to suggest that CQT원방각 of Hado can De a logical foundation that explains the notions of spirit (정신,뇌), internal organs(장부), and meridian system which functions as a solution to the question of 'Russell's Paradox'. There are precedent academic works examining the issue from philosophical aspect such as Sangil Kim's ${\ulcorner}$Han medicine과 러셀역설 해의${\lrcorner}$ Han Medicine and Resolution of Russell's Paradox(2005), and this analysis will further attempt to critically examine such works from a perspective of Han medicine.