Sentence examples for time justification from inspiring English sources
Therefore, apart from confirming that each MI examination requested is the most responsive and appropriate examination for the child at that point in time (justification), it is equally important that imaging practitioners 'child-size' (optimise) each MI examination according to the child's physical characteristics and/or underlying clinical indications [9, 10, 11, 12].
We have transmissivity of first-time justification only if Pr q) ≤ t.
Since Twins* instantiates the disjunctive template, it is non-transmissive of at least first-time justification.
Much of the extant literature on epistemic transmission concentrates on examples of transmission of first-time justification.
In general, no argument satisfying this template together with a given evidence will be transmissive of first-time justification based on that evidence.
Since M-Fail is just the condition of falsehood of M-Trans, M-Fail provides a formal condition sufficient for non-transmissivity of first-time justification.
Note that s acquires first-time justification for Q2 in Twins only if (i) E2 gives her justification for P2, (ii) s knows that P2 entails Q2 and (iii-ft) s acquires first-time justification for believing Q2 in virtue of (i) and (ii).
M-Trans accounts formally for transmissivity of first-time justification in the sense that any deductive argument with premise p, conclusion q and evidence e is transmissive of first-time justification if and only if M-Trans is non-vacuously true.
Note in fact that s acquires first-time justification for Q2 in this case if and only if (i) s has justification for P2 based on her direct perception that P2, (ii) s knows that P2 entails Q2, and (iii-ft) s acquires first-time justification for believing Q2 in virtue of (i) and (ii).
(3) says that if s had not been antecedently justified in believing q, upon learning e, s would have acquired via transmission a first-time justification for believing q. (3) entails that if q were not antecedently justified for s, e would still justify p for s.
Next time, the justification for an increase could be almost anything.
