The phrase "deductive conclusion" is correct and commonly used in written English.
It is typically used in the context of deductive reasoning, which is a logical process of reasoning from general principles to specific conclusions. Example: After examining all the evidence, the detective came to a deductive conclusion that the suspect must have been at the crime scene at the time of the robbery.
The practice of forming physical-object beliefs derived from sense perception is an example of a 'doxastic practice' and the practice of drawing deductive conclusions in a certain way from premises is another.
It shows how the theory and the problem specification can be expressed in a first-order language; and demonstrates that this inference and other similar inferences can be justified as deductive conclusions from the theory and the problem specification.
So far, only deductive conclusions on the probably best proceeding can be drawn by the existing expertise from different studies.
In this deductive procedure conclusions are inferred from a tentative hypothesis.
A demonstration is a deductive argument, the conclusion of which is deduced from firmer, prior premises.
A frequently seen argument is that research based on the H-D method is superior to research based on induction from observations because in deductive inferences the conclusion follows necessarily from the premises.
Nonetheless, there is general consensus in the mathematical community that such methods are not acceptable substitutes for deductive proof of the conclusion.
One function of reason involves "seeing" how evidence supports a conclusion, and in deductive reasoning, "seeing" how conclusions follow from premises.
A deductive argument with premise p, conclusion q and evidence e is non-transmissive of justification if and only if C-Trans is false.
It is often said that the information encoded by (or "contained in" or "expressed by") the conclusion of a deductive argument is encoded by the premises.
