Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 11 views

    Inference in First-Order Logic I

    Uploaded by

    Durai Raj Kumar
    The document discusses inference in first-order logic. It covers reducing first-order inference to propositional inference using techniques like universal instantiation, existential instantiation, and propositionalization through predicate instantiation. However, propositionalization has problems dealing with infinite terms from functions. The document then introduces unification and generalized modus ponens as improved techniques for first-order inference that avoid full propositionalization. Unification allows matching predicates and terms to perform inferences in a single step. Generalized modus ponens extends modus ponens to first-order logic through variable substitutions.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Inference in First-Order Logic I

    Uploaded by

    Durai Raj Kumar
    11 views29 pages
    The document discusses inference in first-order logic. It covers reducing first-order inference to propositional inference using techniques like universal instantiation, existential instantiation, and propositionalization through predicate instantiation. However, propositionalization has problems dealing with infinite terms from functions. The document then introduces unification and generalized modus ponens as improved techniques for first-order inference that avoid full propositionalization. Unification allows matching predicates and terms to perform inferences in a single step. Generalized modus ponens extends modus ponens to first-order logic through variable substitutions.

    Original Description:

    hh

    Original Title

    First Order Logic (1)

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    PPT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document discusses inference in first-order logic. It covers reducing first-order inference to propositional inference using techniques like universal instantiation, existential instantiation, and propositionalization through predicate instantiation. However, propositionalization has problems dealing with infinite terms from functions. The document then introduces unification and generalized modus ponens as improved techniques for first-order inference that avoid full propositionalization. Unification allows matching predicates and terms to perform inferences in a single step. Generalized modus ponens extends modus ponens to first-order logic through variable substitutions.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as ppt, pdf, or txt
    11 views29 pages

    Inference in First-Order Logic I

    Uploaded by

    Durai Raj Kumar
    The document discusses inference in first-order logic. It covers reducing first-order inference to propositional inference using techniques like universal instantiation, existential instantiation, and propositionalization through predicate instantiation. However, propositionalization has problems dealing with infinite terms from functions. The document then introduces unification and generalized modus ponens as improved techniques for first-order inference that avoid full propositionalization. Unification allows matching predicates and terms to perform inferences in a single step. Generalized modus ponens extends modus ponens to first-order logic through variable substitutions.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as ppt, pdf, or txt
    of 29

    Inference in first-order logic I

    CIS 391 Introduction to Artificial Intelligence AIMA Chapter 9.1-9.2 (through p. 278) Chapter 9.5 (through p. 300)

    Outline
    Reducing first-order inference to propositional inference Unification Generalized Modus Ponens

    CIS 391 - Intro to AI

    Universal instantiation (UI)


    Every instantiation of a universally quantified sentence is entailed by it:

    Subst({v/g}, )
    for any variable v and ground term g E.g., x King(x) Greedy(x) Evil(x) yields any or all of:

    King(John) Greedy(John) Evil(John) King(Richard) Greedy(Richard) Evil(Richard) King(Father(John)) Greedy(Father(John)) Evil(Father(John))


    3

    CIS 391 - Intro to AI

    Existential instantiation (EI)


    For any sentence , variable v, and constant symbol k that does not appear elsewhere in the knowledge base:

    Subst({v/k}, )
    E.g., x Crown(x) OnHead(x,John) yields:
    Crown(C1) OnHead(C1,John) provided C1 is a new constant symbol, called a Skolem constant

    CIS 391 - Intro to AI

    Existential Instantiation continued


    UI can be applied several times to add new sentences
    the new KB is logically equivalent to the old

    EI can be applied once to replace the existential sentence


    the new KB is not equivalent to the old but it is satisfiable iff the old KB was satisfiable

    CIS 391 - Intro to AI

    Reduction to propositional inference


    Suppose the KB contains just the following:

    x King(x) Greedy(x) Evil(x)


    King(John) Greedy(John) Brother(Richard,John)

    Instantiating the universal sentence in all possible ways, we have:

    King(John) Greedy(John) Evil(John) King(Richard) Greedy(Richard) Evil(Richard) King(John) Greedy(John) Brother(Richard,John)

    The new KB is propositionalized: proposition symbols are King(John), Greedy(John), Evil(John), King(Richard), etc.

    CIS 391 - Intro to AI

    Reduction contd.
    Claim: Every FOL KB can be propositionalized so as to preserve entailment
    (A ground sentence is entailed by new KB iff entailed by original KB)

    Idea: propositionalize KB and query, apply resolution, return result Problem: with function symbols, there are infinitely many ground terms, e.g., Father(Father(Father(John)))

    CIS 391 - Intro to AI

    Reduction contd.
    Theorem: Herbrand (1930). If a sentence is entailed by an FOL KB, it is entailed by a finite subset of the propositionalized KB Idea: For n = 0 to do create a propositional KB by instantiating with depth-n terms see if is entailed by this KB Problem: works if is entailed, loops if is not entailed Theorem: Turing (1936), Church (1936) Entailment for FOL is semidecidable (algorithms exist that say yes to every entailed sentence, but no algorithm exists that also says no to every nonentailed sentence.)

    CIS 391 - Intro to AI

    Problems with propositionalization


    1. Propositionalization seems to generate lots of irrelevant sentences.
    E.g., from:

    x King(x) Greedy(x) Evil(x)


    King(John) y Greedy(y) Brother(Richard,John)
    it seems obvious that Evil(John), but propositionalization produces lots of facts such as Greedy(Richard) that are irrelevant

    2. With p k-ary predicates and n constants, there are pnk instantiations.


    With function symbols, it gets much, much worse!
    9 CIS 391 - Intro to AI

    Unification
    We can get the inference Evil(John) immediately if we can find a substitution such that King(x) and Greedy(x) match King(John) and Greedy(y)

    = {x/John,y/John} works Unify(,) = if =


    p Knows(John,x) Knows(John,x) Knows(John,x) Knows(John,x) q Knows(John,Jane) Knows(y,OJ) Knows(y,Mother(y)) Knows(x,OJ)

    CIS 391 - Intro to AI

    10

    Unification
    We can get the inference Evil(John) immediately if we can find a substitution such that King(x) and Greedy(x) match King(John) and Greedy(y)

    = {x/John,y/John} works Unify(,) = if =


    p Knows(John,x) Knows(John,x) Knows(John,x) Knows(John,x) q Knows(John,Jane) Knows(y,OJ) Knows(y,Mother(y)) Knows(x,OJ) {x/Jane}}

    CIS 391 - Intro to AI

    11

    Unification
    We can get the inference Evil(John) immediately if we can find a substitution such that King(x) and Greedy(x) match King(John) and Greedy(y)

    = {x/John,y/John} works Unify(,) = if =


    p Knows(John,x) Knows(John,x) Knows(John,x) Knows(John,x) q Knows(John,Jane) Knows(y,OJ) Knows(y,Mother(y)) Knows(x,OJ) {x/Jane}} {x/OJ,y/John}}

    CIS 391 - Intro to AI

    12

    Unification
    We can get the inference Evil(John) immediately if we can find a substitution such that King(x) and Greedy(x) match King(John) and Greedy(y)

    = {x/John,y/John} works Unify(,) = if =


    p Knows(John,x) Knows(John,x) Knows(John,x) Knows(John,x) q Knows(John,Jane) Knows(y,OJ) Knows(y,Mother(y)) Knows(x,OJ) {x/Jane}} {x/OJ,y/John}} {y/John,x/Mother(John)}}

    CIS 391 - Intro to AI

    13

    Unification
    We can get the inference Evil(John) immediately if we can find a substitution such that King(x) and Greedy(x) match King(John) and Greedy(y)

    = {x/John,y/John} works Unify(,) = if =


    p Knows(John,x) Knows(John,x) Knows(John,x) Knows(John,x) q Knows(John,Jane) Knows(y,OJ) Knows(y,Mother(y)) Knows(x,OJ) {x/Jane}} {x/OJ,y/John}} {y/John,x/Mother(John)}} fail

    CIS 391 - Intro to AI

    14

    Unification
    We can get the inference Evil(John) immediately if we can find a substitution such that King(x) and Greedy(x) match King(John) and Greedy(y)

    = {x/John,y/John} works Unify(,) = if =


    p Knows(John,x) Knows(John,x) Knows(John,x) Knows(John,x) q Knows(John,Jane) Knows(y,OJ) Knows(y,Mother(y)) Knows(x,OJ) {x/Jane}} {x/OJ,y/John}} {y/John,x/Mother(John)}} fail

    Standardizing apart eliminates overlap of variables, e.g., Knows(z17,OJ)


    15

    CIS 391 - Intro to AI

    Unification
    To unify Knows(John,x) and Knows(y,z), = {y/John, x/z } or = {y/John, x/John, z/John} The first unifier is more general than the second. There is a single most general unifier (MGU) that is unique up to renaming of variables. MGU = { y/John, x/z }

    CIS 391 - Intro to AI

    16

    The unification algorithm

    CIS 391 - Intro to AI

    17

    The unification algorithm

    CIS 391 - Intro to AI

    18

    Generalized Modus Ponens (GMP)


    p1', p2', , pn', ( p1 p2 pn q) q
    where pi' = pi for all i

    p1' is King(John) p2' is Greedy(y) is {x/John,y/John} q is Evil(John)

    p1 is King(x) p2 is Greedy(x) q is Evil(x)

    GMP used with KB of definite clauses (exactly one positive literal) All variables assumed universally quantified

    CIS 391 - Intro to AI

    19

    Soundness of GMP
    Need to show that
    p1', , pn', (p1 pn q) q

    provided that pi' = pi for all i Lemma: For any definite clause p, we have p p by UI
    1. (p1 pn q) (p1 pn q) = (p1 pn q) 2. p1', , pn' p1' pn' p1' pn' 3. From 1 and 2, q follows by ordinary Modus Ponens

    CIS 391 - Intro to AI

    20

    Resolution: brief summary


    Full first-order version: l1 lk, m1 mn (l1 li-1 li+1 lk m1 mj-1 mj+1 mn) where Unify(li, mj) = .
    The two clauses are assumed to be standardized apart so that they share no variables.

    For example,

    Rich(x) Unhappy(x) Rich(Ken) Unhappy(Ken)

    with = {x/Ken}
    Apply resolution steps to CNF(KB ); complete for FOL
    CIS 391 - Intro to AI 21

    Conversion to CNF for FOL


    Everyone who loves all animals is loved by someone: x [y Animal(y) Loves(x,y)] [y Loves(y,x)]
    x [y Animal(y) Loves(x,y)] [y Loves(y,x)] x [y (Animal(y) Loves(x,y))] [y Loves(y,x)]

    1. Eliminate biconditionals and implications

    2. Move inwards: x p x p, x p x p
    x [y Animal(y) Loves(x,y)] [y Loves(y,x)] x [y Animal(y) Loves(x,y)] [y Loves(y,x)]

    CIS 391 - Intro to AI

    22

    Conversion to CNF contd.


    3. Standardize variables: each quantifier should use a different one x [y Animal(y) Loves(x,y)] [z Loves(z,x)] Skolemize: a more general form of existential instantiation.
    Each existential variable is replaced by a Skolem function of the enclosing universally quantified variables: x [Animal(F(x)) Loves(x,F(x))] Loves(G(x),x)

    4.

    5.

    Drop universal quantifiers: [Animal(F(x)) Loves(x,F(x))] Loves(G(x),x)

    6.

    Distribute over : [Animal(F(x)) Loves(G(x),x)] [Loves(x,F(x)) Loves(G(x),x)]

    CIS 391 - Intro to AI

    23

    Example knowledge base


    The law says that it is a crime for an American to sell weapons to hostile nations. The country Nono, an enemy of America, has some missiles, and all of its missiles were sold to it by Colonel West, who is American.

    Prove that Col. West is a criminal

    CIS 391 - Intro to AI

    24

    Example knowledge base contd.


    ... it is a crime for an American to sell weapons to hostile nations:
    American(x) Weapon(y) Sells(x,y,z) Hostile(z) Criminal(x)

    Nono has some missiles, i.e., x Owns(Nono,x) Missile(x):


    Owns(Nono,M1) and Missile(M1)

    all of its missiles were sold to it by Colonel West


    Missile(x) Owns(Nono,x) Sells(West,x,Nono) Missile(x) Weapon(x) Enemy(x,America) Hostile(x)

    Missiles are weapons:

    An enemy of America counts as "hostile: West, who is American


    American(West)

    The country Nono, an enemy of America


    Enemy(Nono,America)
    CIS 391 - Intro to AI 25

    Resolution proof: definite clauses

    CIS 391 - Intro to AI

    26

    Example proof:

    Did Curiosity kill the cat?

    Jack owns a dog. Every dog owner is an animal lover. No animal lover kills an animal. Either Jack or Curiosity killed the cat, who is named Tuna. Did Curiosity kill the cat? The axioms can be represented as follows: A. (x) Dog(x) ^ Owns(Jack,x) B. (x) ((y) Dog(y) ^ Owns(x, y)) => AnimalLover(x) C. (x) AnimalLover(x) => (y) Animal(y) => ~Kills(x,y) D. Kills(Jack,Tuna) Kills(Curiosity,Tuna) E. Cat(Tuna) F. (x) Cat(x) => Animal(x)
    (This and next 2 slides adapted from CMSC421 Fall 2006, Univ. of Maryland)

    CIS 391 - Intro to AI

    27

    Example: Did Curiosity kill the cat?


    1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Dog(spike) Owns(Jack,spike) ~Dog(y) v ~Owns(x, y) v AnimalLover(x) ~AnimalLover(x1) v ~Animal(y1) v ~Kills(x1,y1) Kills(Jack,Tuna) v Kills(Curiosity,Tuna) Cat(Tuna) ~Cat(x2) v Animal(x2)

    CIS 391 - Intro to AI

    28

    Example: Did Curiosity kill the cat?


    1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. Dog(spike) Owns(Jack,spike) ~Dog(y) v ~Owns(x, y) v AnimalLover(x) ~AnimalLover(x1) v ~Animal(y1) v ~Kills(x1,y1) Kills(Jack,Tuna) v Kills(Curiosity,Tuna) Cat(Tuna) ~Cat(x2) v Animal(x2) ~Kills(Curiosity,Tuna) negated goal Kills(Jack,Tuna) 5,8 ~AnimalLover(Jack) V ~Animal(Tuna) 9,4 x1/Jack,y1/Tuna ~Dog(y) v ~Owns(Jack,y) V ~Animal(Tuna) 10,3 x/Jack ~Owns(Jack,spike) v ~Animal(Tuna) 11,1 ~Animal(Tuna) 12,2 ~Cat(Tuna) 13,7 x2/Tuna False 14,6

    CIS 391 - Intro to AI

    29

    You might also like