Model Minimization Computational Logic Lecture 16

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Applications Computational LogicLecture 11 Michael Genesereth Spring 2004.
Advertisements

Simply Logical – Chapter 2© Peter Flach, 2000 Clausal logic Propositional clausal logic Propositional clausal logic expressions that can be true or false.
Resolution Proof System for First Order Logic
Computer Science CPSC 322 Lecture 25 Top Down Proof Procedure (Ch 5.2.2)
Biointelligence Lab School of Computer Sci. & Eng.
10 October 2006 Foundations of Logic and Constraint Programming 1 Unification ­An overview Need for Unification Ranked alfabeths and terms. Substitutions.
UIUC CS 497: Section EA Lecture #2 Reasoning in Artificial Intelligence Professor: Eyal Amir Spring Semester 2004.
First Order Logic Resolution
Inference and Reasoning. Basic Idea Given a set of statements, does a new statement logically follow from this. For example If an animal has wings and.
We have seen that we can use Generalized Modus Ponens (GMP) combined with search to see if a fact is entailed from a Knowledge Base. Unfortunately, there.
For Friday No reading Homework: –Chapter 9, exercise 4 (This is VERY short – do it while you’re running your tests) Make sure you keep variables and constants.
FORMAL LANGUAGES, AUTOMATA, AND COMPUTABILITY
1 Applied Computer Science II Resolution in FOL Luc De Raedt.
Computability and Complexity 9-1 Computability and Complexity Andrei Bulatov Logic Reminder (Cnt’d)
A Quick Look at Quantified Statements. Why are Quantified Statements Important? The logical structure of quantified statements provides a basis for the.
Logic in Computer Science Transparency No Chapter 3 Propositional Logic 3.6. Propositional Resolution 3.7. Natural Deduction.
Chapter 3 Propositional Logic
Discussion #9 1/9 Discussion #9 Tautologies and Contradictions.
Relation, function 1 Mathematical logic Lesson 5 Relations, mappings, countable and uncountable sets.
Herbrand Models Logic Lecture 2. Example: Models  X(  Y((mother(X)  child_of(Y,X))  loves(X,Y))) mother(mary) child_of(tom,mary)
Proof Systems KB |- Q iff there is a sequence of wffs D1,..., Dn such that Dn is Q and for each Di in the sequence: a) either Di is in KB or b) Di can.
Propositional Resolution Computational LogicLecture 4 Michael Genesereth Spring 2005.
1 Knowledge Based Systems (CM0377) Lecture 4 (Last modified 5th February 2001)
The Bernays-Schönfinkel Fragment of First-Order Autoepistemic Logic Peter Baumgartner MPI Informatik, Saarbrücken.
Advanced Topics in Propositional Logic Chapter 17 Language, Proof and Logic.
CS344: Introduction to Artificial Intelligence Lecture: Herbrand’s Theorem Proving satisfiability of logic formulae using semantic trees (from Symbolic.
CS621: Artificial Intelligence Pushpak Bhattacharyya CSE Dept., IIT Bombay Lecture 28– Interpretation; Herbrand Interpertation 30 th Sept, 2010.
CS Introduction to AI Tutorial 8 Resolution Tutorial 8 Resolution.
Lecture 4: Predicates and Quantifiers; Sets.
Automated Reasoning Early AI explored how to automated several reasoning tasks – these were solved by what we might call weak problem solving methods as.
Kansas State University Department of Computing and Information Sciences CIS 730: Introduction to Artificial Intelligence Lecture 23 Friday, 17 October.
CS6133 Software Specification and Verification
Artificial Intelligence 7. Making Deductive Inferences Course V231 Department of Computing Imperial College, London Jeremy Gow.
LDK R Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation First Order Logics (FOL) Originally by Alessandro Agostini and Fausto Giunchiglia Modified by Fausto.
1 Knowledge Based Systems (CM0377) Lecture 6 (last modified 20th February 2002)
Inference in First Order Logic. Outline Reducing first order inference to propositional inference Unification Generalized Modus Ponens Forward and backward.
Computing & Information Sciences Kansas State University Lecture 12 of 42 CIS 530 / 730 Artificial Intelligence Lecture 12 of 42 William H. Hsu Department.
Complexity 24-1 Complexity Andrei Bulatov Interactive Proofs.
Knowledge Repn. & Reasoning Lecture #9: Propositional Logic UIUC CS 498: Section EA Professor: Eyal Amir Fall Semester 2005.
CSE 311 Foundations of Computing I Lecture 19 Recursive Definitions: Context-Free Grammars and Languages Autumn 2012 CSE
CENG 424-Logic for CS Introduction Based on the Lecture Notes of Konstantin Korovin, Valentin Goranko, Russel and Norvig, and Michael Genesereth.
By P. S. Suryateja Asst. Professor, CSE Vishnu Institute of Technology
Resolution in the Propositional Calculus
CSE 311 Foundations of Computing I
Semantics In propositional logic, we associate atoms with propositions about the world. We specify the semantics of our logic, giving it a “meaning”. Such.
CS201: Data Structures and Discrete Mathematics I
Propositional Resolution
Lesson 5 Relations, mappings, countable and uncountable sets
Relational Proofs Computational Logic Lecture 8
Lesson 5 Relations, mappings, countable and uncountable sets
Back to “Serious” Topics…
MA/CSSE 474 More Math Review Theory of Computation
Metatheorems Computational Logic Lecture 8
Computational Logic Lecture 13
Relational Proofs Computational Logic Lecture 7
Relational Logic Semantics
Logical Entailment Computational Logic Lecture 3
Brief Introduction to Computational Logic
Herbrand Logic Semantics
Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation
CS201: Data Structures and Discrete Mathematics I
Relational Logic Semantics
Relational Proofs Computational Logic Lecture 7
Properties of Relational Logic
Properties of Relational Logic
Relational Proofs Computational Logic Lecture 7
Herbrand Semantics Computational Logic Lecture 15
Resolution Preliminaries
CS589 Principles of DB Systems Fall 2008 Lecture 4e: Logic (Model-theoretic view of a DB) Lois Delcambre
Herbrand Logic Semantics
Presentation transcript:

Model Minimization Computational Logic Lecture 16 Michael Genesereth Autumn 2009

Overview Epilog is a theorem prover for Relational Logic. It is sound and complete. It is at least as efficient as Model Elimination, and it is arguably more efficient. It is somewhat more intuitive than ordinary Resolution. Features: Rule Form instead of Clausal Form Backward Chaining variant of the ME rule Iterative Deepening rather than Breadth-First Search

HHHHerbrand The Herbrand universe for a set of sentences in Relational Logic (with at least one object constant) is the set of all ground terms that can be formed from just the constants used in those sentences. If there are no object constants, then we add an arbitrary object constant, say a. The Herbrand base for a set of sentences is the set of all ground atomic sentences that can be formed using just the constants in the Herbrand universe.

Herbrand Interpretation A Herbrand interpretation for a function-free language is an interpretation in which (1) the universe of discourse is the Herbrand universe for the language and (2) each object constant maps to itself. |i|={a,b} i(a) = a i(b) = b i(r) = {a,a, a,b}

Herbrand Interpretations |i| a b r {a,b} a b {} {a,b} a b {a,a} {a,b} a b {a,b} {a,b} a b {b,a} {a,b} a b {b,b} {a,b} a b {a,a, a,b} {a,b} a b {a,a, b,a} {a,b} a b {a,a, b,b} {a,b} a b {a,b, b,a} {a,b} a b {a,b, b,b} {a,b} a b {b,a, b,b} {a,b} a b {a,a, a,b, b,a} {a,b} a b {a,a, a,b, b,b} {a,b} a b {a,a, b,a, b,b} {a,b} a b {a,b, b,a, b,b} {a,b} a b {a,a, a,b, b,a, b,b}

Herbrand Theorem Herbrand Theorem: A set of quantifier-free sentences in Relational Logic is satisfiable if and only if it has a Herbrand model. Construction of Herbrand model h given i. The model assigns every object constant to itself. The interpretation for relation constant  is the set of all tuples of object constants 1 ,…, n such that i satisfies the sentence (1 ,…, n).

Example Interpretation |i|={, } i(a) =  i(b) =  i(r) = {,, ,} Herbrand Base {r(a,a), r(a,b), r(b,a), r(b,b)} Herbrand Interpretation |i|={a,b} i(a) = a i(b) = b i(r) = {a,b, b,b}

{r(a,a), r(a,b), r(b,a), r(b,b)} Example Interpretation |i|={, , } i(a) =  i(b) =  i(r) = {,, ,, ,} Herbrand Base {r(a,a), r(a,b), r(b,a), r(b,b)} Herbrand Interpretation |i|={a,b} i(a) = a i(b) = b i(r) = {a,b, b,b}

Herbrand Theorem Herbrand Theorem: A set of quantifier-free sentences is satisfiable if and only if it has a Herbrand model that satisfies it. Proof. Assume the set of sentences contains at least one object constant. If not, then create a tautology involving a constant (say a) and add to the set. This does not change the satisfiability of the sentences. If a set of quantifier-free sentences is satisfiable, then there is an interpretation that satisfies it. Take the set of all ground atoms satisfied by this interpretation. By definition, this is a Herbrand interpretation. Moreover, it satisfies the sentences. If the sentences are ground, it must agree with the original interpretation on all of the sentences, since they are all ground and mention only the constants common to both interpretations. If the sentences contain variables, the instances must all be true, including those in which the variables are replaced only by elements in the Herbrand universe. QED