Hello!

I'm finally going to implement a properly working C mode for my SAT-CG. ^_^ 
 (In case you weren't at the Nodalida CG workshop and are wondering who is 
this crazy person, see paper 
<http://www.hf.uio.no/iln/om/organisasjon/tekstlab/aktuelt/arrangementer/2015/nodalida15_submission_91.pdf>
 & code <https://github.com/inariksit/cgsat>). 

I'll likely have more questions later on, but let's start with a simple 
one: the interaction of NOT and C mode.

Is there any difference between the following rules:

REMOVE (a) IF (NOT 1 (b)) ;
REMOVE (a) IF (NOT 1C (b));

I would've thought that there is a difference. A context that matches  1C 
(b) also matches  1 (b) but not vice versa, thus there should be more cases 
that match NOT 1C (b) than NOT 1 (b).

matches NOT 1C (b):

1C (b) | 1C (^b)
-------|--------
1  (b) | 1  (^b)


matches NOT 1 (b):

1C (b) | 1C (^b)
-------|--------
1  (b) | 1  (^b)


However, when I was testing with the following rules and input 
http://pastebin.com/JNjjZdSH, the result was identical. Is this the 
intended behaviour? Is there some kind of intuition for negating a careful 
context?
I grepped from all the CGs in Apertium repo that I had, and found 127 
occurrences of NOT + C mode (in total >8000 occurrences of NOT), so it 
seems not to be used that much anyway.

Note that I'm not requesting to change the behaviour, I just want to make 
sure that I have the correct interpretation. I was reading this 
http://beta.visl.sdu.dk/cg3.html but didn't find comments on that.

Cheers,
Inari

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Constraint Grammar" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/constraint-grammar.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to