F22H1 Logic and Proof Week 5 Overview of weeks 5—9 Predicates and Quantifiers.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Artificial Intelligence
Advertisements

1.3 Predicates and Quantifiers
Artificial Intelligence in the 21 st Century S. Lucci / D. Kopec Chapter 5: Logic in Artificial Intelligence 1.
The Logic of Quantified Statements
1 A formula in predicate logic An atom is a formula. If F is a formula then (~F) is a formula. If F and G are Formulae then (F /\ G), (F \/ G), (F → G),
Knowledge & Reasoning Logical Reasoning: to have a computer automatically perform deduction or prove theorems Knowledge Representations: modern ways of.
CPSC 121: Models of Computation Unit 6 Rewriting Predicate Logic Statements Based on slides by Patrice Belleville and Steve Wolfman.
Af2 Introduction. What’s the course about? Discrete Mathematics The mathematics that underpins computer science and other sciences as well.
L41 Lecture 2: Predicates and Quantifiers.. L42 Agenda Predicates and Quantifiers –Existential Quantifier  –Universal Quantifier 
F22H1 Logic and Proof Week 7 Clausal Form and Resolution.
RMIT University; Taylor's College This is a story about four people named Everybody, Somebody, Anybody and Nobody. There was an important job to be done.
CAS LX 502 Semantics 1b. The Truth Ch. 1.
CSE 311 Foundations of Computing I Lecture 6 Predicate Logic Autumn 2011 CSE 3111.
1 Predicates and quantifiers Chapter 8 Formal Specification using Z.
First Order Logic (chapter 2 of the book) Lecture 3: Sep 14.
Introduction to Proofs ch. 1.6, pg. 87,93 Muhammad Arief download dari
Formal Logic Mathematical Structures for Computer Science Chapter 1 Copyright © 2006 W.H. Freeman & Co.MSCS SlidesFormal Logic.
Predicates and Quantifiers
CSE 311 Foundations of Computing I Lecture 6 Predicate Logic, Logical Inference Spring
CSci 2011 Discrete Mathematics Lecture 3 CSci 2011.
CSCI 2110 Discrete Mathematics Tutorial 10 Chin 1.
2009/9 1 Logic and Proofs §1.1 Introduction §1.2 Propositional Equivalences §1.3 Predicates and Quantifiers §1.4 Nested Quantifiers §1.5~7 Methods of Proofs.
Formal Logic Mathematical Structures for Computer Science Chapter Copyright © 2006 W.H. Freeman & Co.MSCS SlidesFormal Logic.
CS 173, Lecture B September 1, 2015 Tandy Warnow.
MATH 224 – Discrete Mathematics
CSE 311: Foundations of Computing Fall 2013 Lecture 8: More Proofs.
Week 3 - Monday.  What did we talk about last time?  Predicate logic  Multiple quantifiers  Negating multiple quantifiers  Arguments with quantified.
1 Chapter 7 Propositional and Predicate Logic. 2 Chapter 7 Contents (1) l What is Logic? l Logical Operators l Translating between English and Logic l.
CS 173, Lecture B August 27, 2015 Tandy Warnow. Proofs You want to prove that some statement A is true. You can try to prove it directly, or you can prove.
Methods of Proofs PREDICATE LOGIC The “Quantifiers” and are known as predicate quantifiers. " means for all and means there exists. Example 1: If we.
Chapter 1, Part II: Predicate Logic With Question/Answer Animations.
Copyright © Cengage Learning. All rights reserved. CHAPTER 3 THE LOGIC OF QUANTIFIED STATEMENTS THE LOGIC OF QUANTIFIED STATEMENTS.
Course Overview and Road Map Computability and Logic.
Lecture 1.2: Equivalences, and Predicate Logic* CS 250, Discrete Structures, Fall 2011 Nitesh Saxena *Adopted from previous lectures by Cinda Heeren, Zeph.
Chapter 1: The Foundations: Logic and Proofs 1.1 Propositional Logic 1.2 Propositional Equivalences 1.3 Predicates and Quantifiers 1.4 Nested Quantifiers.
1 Predicate (Relational) Logic 1. Introduction The propositional logic is not powerful enough to express certain types of relationship between propositions.
1 CMSC 250 Discrete Structures CMSC 250 Lecture 1.
CSE 311 Foundations of Computing I Lecture 7 Logical Inference Autumn 2012 CSE
Hazırlayan DISCRETE COMPUTATIONAL STRUCTURES Propositional Logic PROF. DR. YUSUF OYSAL.
Automated Reasoning Early AI explored how to automated several reasoning tasks – these were solved by what we might call weak problem solving methods as.
1 Introduction to Abstract Mathematics Predicate Logic Instructor: Hayk Melikya Purpose of Section: To introduce predicate logic (or.
Chapter 1: The Foundations: Logic and Proofs
Discrete Structures – CNS 2300
CS 285- Discrete Mathematics Lecture 4. Section 1.3 Predicate logic Predicate logic is an extension of propositional logic that permits concisely reasoning.
Discrete Structures Predicate Logic 1 Dr. Muhammad Humayoun Assistant Professor COMSATS Institute of Computer Science, Lahore.
First Order Logic Lecture 3: Sep 13 (chapter 2 of the book)
Predicates and Quantifiers Dr. Yasir Ali. 1.Predicates 2.Quantifiers a.Universal Quantifiers b.Existential Quantifiers 3.Negation of Quantifiers 4.Universal.
22C:19 Discrete Structures Logic and Proof Fall 2014 Sukumar Ghosh.
Week 3 - Monday.  What did we talk about last time?  Predicate logic  Multiple quantifiers  Negating multiple quantifiers  Arguments with quantified.
Week 4 - Friday.  What did we talk about last time?  Floor and ceiling  Proof by contradiction.
Lecture 041 Predicate Calculus Learning outcomes Students are able to: 1. Evaluate predicate 2. Translate predicate into human language and vice versa.
Section 1.4. Propositional Functions Propositional functions become propositions (and have truth values) when their variables are each replaced by a value.
Introduction to Predicates and Quantified Statements I Lecture 9 Section 2.1 Wed, Jan 31, 2007.
Propositional Logic. Assignment Write any five rules each from two games which you like by using propositional logic notations.
Instructor: Chris Trenkov Hands-on Course Python for Absolute Beginners (Spring 2015) Class #003 (February 14, 2015)
Knowledge Representation Lecture 2 out of 5. Last Week Intelligence needs knowledge We need to represent this knowledge in a way a computer can process.
رياضيات متقطعة لعلوم الحاسب MATH 226. Chapter 1 Predicates and Quantifiers 1.4.
Lecture 1 – Formal Logic.
Predicate Logic Lecture 7.
Discrete Structures for Computer Science
CS201: Data Structures and Discrete Mathematics I
Copyright © Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
CSE 311 Foundations of Computing I
Mathematics for Computer Science MIT 6.042J/18.062J
Discrete Mathematics Lecture 4 & 5: Predicate and Quantifier
Negations of quantifiers
Discrete Mathematics CMP-200 Propositional Equivalences, Predicates & Quantifiers, Negating Quantified Statements Abdul Hameed
George Boole English Mathematician
Predicates and Quantifiers
CS201: Data Structures and Discrete Mathematics I
Presentation transcript:

F22H1 Logic and Proof Week 5 Overview of weeks 5—9 Predicates and Quantifiers

Overview of rest of module Contacting me: Monday lecture: lecture Thursday/Friday: practice We will cover much but not all of: Nederpelt & Kamareddine: Chapters 8, 9, 11, 16, 17 Two lectures (not from book) on the topics of clausal form and resolution.

What we will do this week Chapters 8 and 9, and the exercises therein. What you will learn about: Predicates and Quantifiers: predicate logic Translating english into predicate logic Equivalences in predicate logic Examinable material: Sections: 8.2, 8.3, 8.4, 9.1—9.9

Propositions vs Predicates Let A stand for: “Bob is a student” A is a proposition – it is either True or False – definitely one or the other. Now let S = {Anna, Bill, Callum, Dave, …} … the set of students, and let P be the set of all people, and let x be a variable. “x is a student” is not a proposition. What is it?

Propositions vs Predicates Instead of “x is a student”, we typically invent suitable function names and write predicates as functions. E.g. here are a few examples: Which of these are predicates and which are propositions? student(x) cat(Tom) taller_than(Madonna, x) prime_minister_of(x, y) hates(Garfield, Mondays)

Quantifiers Let S be the set of all students; “x is a student” is a predicate we can decide to write it as: “x in S” instead, or maybe “student(x)” Suppose P is the set of all people. With quantifiers, we can express other possible statements: This is universal quantification  x [P(x): student(x)] -- “every person is a student”  x [S(x): has_a_brain(x)] -- “every student has a brain”

Quantifiers  x [P(x): student(x)] “there exists a member of P who is a student” --- i.e. “at least one person is a student” – i.e. there is a student  x [P(x): student(x) AND  attends_lectures(x) ]  x [S(x):  attends_lectures(x) ]   x [S(x): attends_lectures(x) ]

Exercises

Many-place predicates

This is what chapter 9 is all about:

This means, for example:

All this means is: “ Every man or woman has an ID card” is equivalent to: “Every man has an ID card AND Every woman has an ID card” “There is a man or a woman at the top of the mountain” is equivalent to: “There is a man at the top of the mountain OR there is a woman at the top of the mountain”

This just means: “Every person who is Tom lives in Edinburgh” is equivalent to “Tom lives in Edinburgh” And “There is someone who is Tom who lives in Edinburgh” is equivalent to “Tom lives in Edinburgh” Obviously, the quantification isn’t needed in such cases; all the rule does is remove it.

These seem rather daft. But the expressions on the LHS might arise in the middle of trying to prove something, and so the rule helps to automatically simplify it. E.g. we may have: The domain is equivalent to False (why?), so the whole thing = True Don’t worry about it; logic provides a language that enables us to express anything at all in a formal way that computers can manipulate; But logic is powerful enough to also express crazy things like this that we would never say, however they may arise during calculation.

Proving the first of the “Empty domain” rules

Domain Weakening We can move the domain statements to the right, and make them part of the proposition. This is obvious when you think of it. Means: “For all x in D, A(x)” Means: “For all, if x is in D then A(x)” Logically, there is no difference “There is an x in D for which A(x)” is equivalent to “There is an x in D and A(x)”

These observations lead to the following rules: E.g.: “Every student who attends lectures and works hard will pass” is equivalent to: “For every student who attends lectures, if they work hard they’ll pass” “There is a closed passenger door with a red light flashing” is equivalent to: “There is a closed door, which is a passenger door and has a red light flashing” but not equivalent to “There is a closed door, and if it is a passenger door then it has a red light flashing”

“It is NOT true that every student eats cheese” is equivalent to: “There exists a student who does not eat cheese” “There does NOT exist a camel that can dance the samba” is equivalent to: “Every camel cannot dance the samba”

Some practice with logical calculation Showing:

Term Splitting

Some exercises