This book provides different mathematical frameworks for addressing supervised learning. It is based on a workshop held under the auspices of the Center for Nonlinear Studies at Los Alamos and the Santa Fe Institute in the summer of 1992.

In the first BACOMET volume different perspectives on issues concerning teacher education in mathematics were presented (B. Christiansen, A. G. Howson and M. Otte, Perspectives on Mathematics Education, Reidel, Dordrecht, 1986). Underlying all of them was the fundamental problem area of the relationships between mathematical knowledge and the teaching and learning processes. The subsequent project BACOMET 2, whose outcomes are presented in this book, continued this work, especially by focusing on the genesis of mathematical knowledge in the classroom. The book developed over the period 1985-9 through several meetings, much discussion and considerable writing and redrafting. Our major concern was to try to analyse what we considered to be the most significant aspects of the relationships in order to enable mathematics educators to be better able to handle the kinds of complex issues facing all mathematics educators as we approach the end of the twentieth century. With access to mathematics education widening all the time, with a multi tude of new materials and resources being available each year, with complex cultural and social interactions creating a fluctuating context of education, with all manner of technology becoming more and more significant, and with both informal education (through media of different kinds) and non formal education (courses of training etc. ) growing apace, the nature of formal mathematical education is increasingly needing analysis.

How does a machine learn a new concept on the basis of examples? This second edition takes account of important new developments in the field. It also deals extensively with the theory of learning control systems, now comparably mature to learning of neural networks.

In Greek geometry, there is an arithmetic of magnitudes in which, in terms of numbers, only integers are involved. This theory of measure is limited to exact measure. Operations on magnitudes cannot be actually numerically calculated, except if those magnitudes are exactly measured by a certain unit. The theory of proportions does not have access to such operations. It cannot be seen as an "arithmetic" of ratios. Even if Euclidean geometry is done in a highly theoretical context, its axioms are essentially semantic. This is contrary to Mahoney's second characteristic. This cannot be said of the theory of proportions, which is less semantic. Only synthetic proofs are considered rigorous in Greek geometry. Arithmetic reasoning is also synthetic, going from the known to the unknown. Finally, analysis is an approach to geometrical problems that has some algebraic characteristics and involves a method for solving problems that is different from the arithmetical approach. 3. GEOMETRIC PROOFS OF ALGEBRAIC RULES Until the second half of the 19th century, Euclid's Elements was considered a model of a mathematical theory. This may be one reason why geometry was used by algebraists as a tool to demonstrate the accuracy of rules otherwise given as numerical algorithms. It may also be that geometry was one way to represent general reasoning without involving specific magnitudes. To go a bit deeper into this, here are three geometric proofs of algebraic rules, the frrst by Al-Khwarizmi, the other two by Cardano.

This volume is, as may be readily apparent, the fruit of many years’ labor in archives and libraries, unearthing rare books, researching Nachlässe, and above all, systematic comparative analysis of fecund sources. The work not only demanded much time in preparation, but was also interrupted by other duties, such as time spent as a guest professor at universities abroad, which of course provided welcome opportunities to present and discuss the work, and in particular, the organizing of the 1994 International Graßmann Conference and the subsequent editing of its proceedings. If it is not possible to be precise about the amount of time spent on this work, it is possible to be precise about the date of its inception. In 1984, during research in the archive of the École polytechnique, my attention was drawn to the way in which the massive rupture that took place in 1811—precipitating the change back to the synthetic method and replacing the limit method by the method of the quantités infiniment petites—significantly altered the teaching of analysis at this first modern institution of higher education, an institution originally founded as a citadel of the analytic method.

This book is the first major study of advanced mathematical thinking as performed by mathematicians and taught to students in senior high school and university. Topics covered include the psychology of advanced mathematical thinking, the processes involved, mathematical creativity, proof, the role of definitions, symbols, and reflective abstraction. It is highly appropriate for the college professor in mathematics or the general mathematics educator.