To evaluate a probabilistic generalization we need to do more than to find one or two counterexamples. Which of the following questions should be asked when evaluating the logical strength of a probabilistic generalization?a) Can I think of at least three possible counterexamples?
b) is the generalization consistent with common sense?
c) were enough cases considered?
d) what are the implications of the generalizations, if it is true?

c) were enough cases considered?

Explanation:

Probabilistic generalization is proposed in which possibilities on formal contexts is considered; probabilistic formal concepts that have projective force are distinct: nonclassified objects can be allocated to an initially found probabilistic formal concepts; the random features are eradicated from probabilistic formal concepts; probabilistic formal concepts are also very encompassing in terms to data noise. The outcome of experiment is presented in which the formal concepts (in their regular definition in FCA) are first altered by random noise and then improved by identifying probabilistic formal concepts.

heyo, whats up

when you sing louad enough the vibration of you voice is able to shatter glass so yes vibration is your answer

if this mark brainliest i wolud be happy and have a great day you!

i believe the answer is: description

description refers to the goal of psychologist to identify the phenomenon that being observed. this goal is being actualized by collecting data/information from various clues that observed through the phenomenon. this goal must be accomplished before pyschologist able to create methods of treatment.