[Attempto] Should I expect RACE to figure this out?

[Joshua TAYLOR]

On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 4:05 PM, Norbert E. Fuchs <fuchs at ifi.uzh.ch> wrote:
> First, Joshua writes
>
>> I tried running the axioms through the consistency checker, and got
>> warnings "the room" (that if it was supposed to be anaphoric, then it
>> needed a  referent).  I tried adding the axiom "There is a room." and
>> the proof works:
>
> We need to distinguish between the warning of the ACE parser that "the room" has no antecedent, and RACE not being able to do the proof because the axioms do not introduce a room.

Yes, indeed.  My intent there was just to show that sometimes using
the parser can highlight possibly problematic issues in the text,
i.e., as a sort of sanity check, and a first high-level pass at things
that might be reasonable to change.

> Second, as Kaarel wrote the axiom "If a person is outside a room then the person is not inside a room." is sufficient. You need not write "if a person is outside the room then the person is not inside the room. if a person is inside the room then the person is not outside the room."

Although here, the latter article should still be definite:

"If a person is outside a room then the person is not inside the room."

(But of course the point stands concerning the conditional and its
contrapositive.)

//JT

-- 
Joshua Taylor, http://www.cs.rpi.edu/~tayloj/