What’s the proof complexity of E-KRHyper (E-hyper tableau calculus)?

Before the question, let me explain better what is E-KRHyper:

E-KRHyper is a theorem proving and model generation system for first-order logic with equality. It is an implementation of the E-hyper tableau calculus, which integrates a superposition-based handling of equality into the hyper tableau calculus (source: System Description: E-KRHyper).

I am interested in the complexity of system E-KRHyper because it is used in the question-answer system Log-Answer (LogAnswer – A Deduction-Based Question Answering System (System Description)).

I have found a partial answer:

our calculus is a non-trivial decision procedure for this fragment (with equality), which captures the complexity class NEXPTIME (source: Hyper Tableaux with Equality).

I don’t understand much of complexity theory so my question is:

What is the complexity of a theorem to be proved in terms of the number of axioms in the database and in terms of some parameter of the question to be answered?

What’s the difference between Small and Medium?

In Pathfinder 1st edition, a Small character received the following benefits and detriments compared to a Medium character:

  • +1 AC
  • +1 on attack rolls
  • +4 on Stealth checks
  • -1 CMB
  • -1 CMD
  • lower weapon damage die
  • 3/4 the carrying capacity
  • 1/2 the weight of armor and gear

In 2nd edition, none of those changes seem to be in effect and I can’t find any mention of new ones. So while Gnomes, Goblins, and Halflings are all listed as size Small, it doesn’t seem to make any difference. Are there any benefits or detriments to being Small in 2e?

What’s best way to take rules as inputs from user?

I am creating an automation tool which helps users in automating various tasks such as sending top-performing products, outlets, etc. I am stuck in the planning phase as what kind of user interface I will need so a user can define rules.

I have so far come up with the following approach,
I will have all columns name into a component, so the user can make expressions using components and pre-defined operators. Now those are base components, I want to allow the user to create programmable components, with which user can define the definition of it and can access the value of this component this in other components making.

Base components will be like,

  • Item Price
  • Item sold qty
  • Item current qty
  • Item stock
  • Item margin

Programmable components can be of like,

  • Top performing item
    Max of (sold qty * margin)
  • OOS soon items
    Min of (current qty + stock)

Programmable components can be anything similar to the user can query on the same database, so should I use query language similar approach to take inputs or?


What’s the different between LCOM-HS and LCOM?

I am currently testing my software with JHawk6 (static analysis tool) as my undergraduate thesis. One of the cohesion metric is LCOM (lack of cohesion in methods). There’s two kinds of LCOM which is LCOM by CK (Chidamber & Kemerer) and LCOM by HS (Henderson-Sellers). I am trying to find the main differences between them.

As i am going to include the testing result in my thesis. I am unable to find the differences altough i already read some paper [1] [2] [3]. Should i include both of them?

[1] Briand, L., Daly, J. and Wüst, J. (1998). Empirical Software Engineering, 3(1), pp.65-117.

[2] Chidamber, S. and Kemerer, C. (1994). A metrics suite for object oriented design. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 20(6), pp.476-493.

[3] Izadkhah, H., & Hooshyar, M. (2017). Class Cohesion Metrics for Software Engineering: A Critical Review. The Computer Science Journal of Moldova, 25, 44-74.

prevent “what’s new in ubuntu” from opening when I log into ubuntu 18.04

I use the fvwm desktop manager rather than ubuntu, but sometimes i have to log into ubuntu. Whenever I do, this infuriating dialog box opens saying “What’s new in ubuntu”. I want to disable this screen. I’ve googled all over the place but nothing comes up. Could somebody advise how to get rid of the thing please?

What’s the best way to show a user that a field is tappable?

I have an Android application that displays information row by row. Like below

Field                         Value

Field                         Value

Field                         Value

Some of the rows can be tapped to display more information in the form of an Android Toast. I was wondering what the best way to inform the user that some of the rows are tappable. My first thought was to display an exclamation mark on the row, but it doesn’t necessarily make sense for an exclamation mark to be there.


Thanks for all the help, it’s appreciated

What’s the best kind of test for complex calculations without access to external resources?

I have two libraries that handle the mapping from one family of objects to another one. I had to create a middle set of objects for other transformations.

So, the NativeConverters libray converts elements NativeElement to MiddleElement, and the ViewModelConverters library converts MiddleElement to ViewModelElements.

I have unit tests (with NUnit) for both NativeConverters and ViewModelConverters. So the single conversion works well.

Now, I want to test the whole process: given a converter from NativeConverters and another one from ViewModelConverters, I want to test that a NativeElement gets converted correctly into a ViewModelElement.

I don’t need access to DB, file system or whaterver, so I’m not sure that Integration tests are the best choice. But I’m not testing a single method, so it shouldn’t be a unit test.

What kind of test do you think could best fit this case?
Do you know any library for C#?