Ambiguous Absolute Value Expressions
Is there a standard "order of operations" for parallel vs nested absolute value expressions, in the absence of clarifying notation?
Cross-posted from here.
Want to get notified about new posts? Join the mailing list.
Consider the expression
One way to interpret this is that there are two products being added together:
But you could also interpret it as the absolute value of an expression that itself contains an absolute value:
These two interpretations are not equivalent. For instance, substituting $x=0{:}$
Granted, this is a contrived example and I’ve never actually seen an ambiguous case come up in real life (or in any math textbook). I only stumbled upon this while developing algorithms to handle edge cases in a free response grader a couple years ago. (And even then, behavior on this edge case doesn’t make a difference in practice since none of the correct answers that would be graded against involve ambiguous notation.)
I also realize that the expression could be made un-ambiguous by explicitly writing multiplication symbols, or by tweaking the absolute value notation to distinguish between left bars and right bars (e.g. via sizing/spacing/padding, or by writing $\textrm{abs}(\cdot)$ instead of $\vert \cdot \vert$). And I realize that there are obvious ways to solve this issue in the context of software (e.g. designing a user interface that avoids ambiguous notation, or using heuristics like choosing the interpretation with the lowest nesting depth).
But I’m still curious to know: given an ambiguous absolute value expression, is there a standard convention for interpreting it? In other words, loosely speaking, is there a standard “order of operations” for parallel vs nested absolute value expressions, in the absence of clarifying notation? (The answer may be that there is no agreed-upon rule.)
So far, the most convincing argument I’ve seen was Dave L Renfro’s comment on this StackExchange answer:
- "If there is [a standard convention], then it almost certainly would only be applied in a computer coding (or calculator) setting, and it would not generally be known in the mathematical community"
In other words, this comment suggests that there is no agreed-upon rule: mathematicians use symbol sizing (or other notational means) to avoid ambiguity and therefore have no need for a rule to interpret ambiguous cases (since ambiguous cases shouldn’t exist in a mathematical text).
Want to get notified about new posts? Join the mailing list.