The only general results known so far for the stability of the stationary solutions are those of Atay and Hutt (see, for example, [20]): they found a bound similar to condition 2 in Proposition 3.15 by using the CVs, but no proof of stability was given.
holds for every convex μ-integrable function f : I → R. The version of Theorem B for the bounded closed intervals A and B was proved in [[2], Proposition 1] by using the chord line y = f [ a, b ] c h o ( x ) when A = [ a, b ].
From assumption of η and Proposition 2.1, by using a similar argument as in the proof of Theorem 3.1, we may show that (Vert overline{x}(k) Vert ^{p}leqfrac{c_{2}}{c_{1}}Vert phi Vert ^{p}e^{-lambda k-k_{0})}+frac{a}{c_{1}}, forall kgeq k_{0}).
Theorem 1.1 follows from Propositions 2.3 2.6 by using the triangle inequality immediately.
The proof of following proposition is same as of Proposition 3.1 and by using Corollary 2.9.
This paper introduces a new framework for modeling quantifiers in natural languages in which each linguistic quantifier is represented by a family of fuzzy measures, and the truth value of a quantified proposition is evaluated by using Sugeno's integral.
Rebut the proposition's arguments by using a new and different angle for your argument.
Frege concluded that we need a Begriffsschrift, distinct from the languages we naturally speak, in order to depict (and help us discern) the structures of the propositions we express by using natural languages.
Proof It is easy to verify the propositions mentioned above by using the definition of PBTOCAS in (3), so we leave them out here.
From the experimental validation of the properties proposed in Propositions (1, 4) by using the physical robot Mamba, we can conclude that the control-oriented model presented in "Control-oriented model of underwater snake robots" captures the essential properties of the underwater snake robot locomotion.
