A Logic of Arbitrary and Indefinite Objects Stuart C. Shapiro Department of Computer Science and Engineering, and Center for Cognitive Science.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Artificial Intelligence
Advertisements

1 Knowledge Representation Introduction KR and Logic.
Charting the Potential of Description Logic for the Generation of Referring Expression SELLC, Guangzhou, Dec Yuan Ren, Kees van Deemter and Jeff.
First-Order Logic (and beyond)
Propositional Logic CMSC 471 Chapter , 7.7 and Chuck Dyer
SPECIFYING MODALITIES IN THE MGLAIR ARCHITECTURE Stuart C. Shapiro and Jonathan P. Bona Department of Computer Science and Engineering And Center for Cognitive.
S.C. Shapiro Knowledge Representation and Reasoning Stuart C. Shapiro Professor, CSE Director, SNePS Research Group Member, Center for Cognitive.
– Alfred North Whitehead,
INTRODUCTION TO ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE Massimo Poesio LECTURE 4: Semantic Networks and Description Logics.
Outline Recap Knowledge Representation I Textbook: Chapters 6, 7, 9 and 10.
The GLAIR Architecture for Cognitive Robotics Stuart C. Shapiro Department of Computer Science & Engineering and Center for Cognitive Science.
The GLAIR Cognitive Architecture and Prospects for Consciousness Stuart C. Shapiro Department of Computer Science & Engineering and Center.
The GLAIR Cognitive Architecture Stuart C. Shapiro and Jonathan P. Bona Department of Computer Science & Engineering Center for Cognitive Science.
The GLAIR Architecture for Cognitive Robots Stuart C. Shapiro Department of Computer Science & Engineering and Center for Cognitive Science.
Knowledge Representation for Self-Aware Computer Systems Stuart C. Shapiro Department of Computer Science and Engineering, and Center for Cognitive.
S.C. Shapiro Development of a Cognitive Agent Stuart C. Shapiro Department of Computer Science and Engineering and Center for Cognitive Science.
S.C. Shapiro Endowing Agents with a Personal Sense of Time Haythem O. Ismail & Stuart C. Shapiro Department of Computer Science and Engineering.
Symbolic Representation and Reasoning an Overview Stuart C. Shapiro Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Center for Multisource.
S.C. Shapiro Knowledge Representation for Natural Language Competence Stuart C. Shapiro Department of Computer Science and Engineering and.
Cassie as a Self-Aware SNePS/GLAIR Agent Stuart C. Shapiro Department of Computer Science and Engineering, and Center for Cognitive Science.
S.C. Shapiro Knowledge Representation and Reasoning Stuart C. Shapiro Professor, CSE Director, SNePS Research Group Member, Center for Cognitive.
S.C. Shapiro An Intelligent Interface to a GIS Stuart C. Shapiro Professor, CSE Director, SNePS Research Group Member, Center for Cognitive.
Semantics of a Propositional Network Stuart C. Shapiro Department of Computer Science & Engineering Center for MultiSource Information Fusion.
S.C. Shapiro Symbol-Anchoring in Cassie Stuart C. Shapiro and Haythem O. Ismail Department of Computer Science and Engineering and Center for.
© 2002 Franz J. Kurfess Introduction 1 CPE/CSC 481: Knowledge-Based Systems Dr. Franz J. Kurfess Computer Science Department Cal Poly.
S.C. Shapiro Symbol Anchoring in a Grounded Layered Architecture with Integrated Reasoning Stuart C. Shapiro Department of Computer Science.
SNePS 3 for Ontologies Stuart C. Shapiro Department of Computer Science and Engineering, and Center for Cognitive Science University at Buffalo,
Research in Knowledge Representation, Reasoning, and Acting Stuart C. Shapiro Professor, CSE Director, Center for Cognitive Science Director,
Improving Recovery for Belief Bases Frances L. Johnson & Stuart C. Shapiro Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Center for Multisource.
A Logic of Arbitrary and Indefinite Objects Stuart C. Shapiro Department of Computer Science and Engineering, and Center for Cognitive Science.
S.C. Shapiro An Introduction to SNePS 3 Stuart C. Shapiro Department of Computer Science and Engineering and Center for Cognitive Science State.
Knowledge Representation and Reasoning University "Politehnica" of Bucharest Department of Computer Science Fall 2010 Adina Magda Florea
A Brief Summary for Exam 1 Subject Topics Propositional Logic (sections 1.1, 1.2) –Propositions Statement, Truth value, Proposition, Propositional symbol,
Ming Fang 6/12/2009. Outlines  Classical logics  Introduction to DL  Syntax of DL  Semantics of DL  KR in DL  Reasoning in DL  Applications.
Inference Graphs: A Roadmap Daniel R. Schlegel and Stuart C. Department of Computer Science and Engineering L A – Logic of Arbitrary.
CSE PredLogic 1 Knowledge Representation with Logic: First Order Predicate Calculus Outline –Introduction to First Order Predicate Calculus (FOPC)
Presented by:- Somya Gupta( ) Akshat Malu ( ) Swapnil Ghuge ( ) Franz Baader, Ian Horrocks, and Ulrike Sattler.
1 CMSC 471 Fall 2002 Class #10/12–Wednesday, October 2 / Wednesday, October 9.
Concurrent Inference Graphs Daniel R. Schlegel Department of Computer Science and Engineering Problem Summary Inference graphs 2 in their current form.
Semantic web course – Computer Engineering Department – Sharif Univ. of Technology – Fall Description Logics: Logic foundation of Semantic Web Semantic.
Computing & Information Sciences Kansas State University Wednesday, 20 Sep 2006CIS 490 / 730: Artificial Intelligence Lecture 12 of 42 Wednesday, 20 September.
Kansas State University Department of Computing and Information Sciences CIS 730: Introduction to Artificial Intelligence Lecture 11 of 41 Wednesday, 15.
Kansas State University Department of Computing and Information Sciences CIS 730: Introduction to Artificial Intelligence Lecture 13 of 41 Monday, 20 September.
Computing & Information Sciences Kansas State University Lecture 13 of 42 CIS 530 / 730 Artificial Intelligence Lecture 13 of 42 William H. Hsu Department.
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE [INTELLIGENT AGENTS PARADIGM] Professor Janis Grundspenkis Riga Technical University Faculty of Computer Science and Information.
Knowledge Representation and Reasoning in SNePS for Bioinformatics Stuart C. Shapiro Department of Computer Science and Engineering, and Center.
Kansas State University Department of Computing and Information Sciences CIS 730: Introduction to Artificial Intelligence Lecture 12 Friday, 17 September.
Computing & Information Sciences Kansas State University Lecture 14 of 42 CIS 530 / 730 Artificial Intelligence Lecture 14 of 42 William H. Hsu Department.
Logical Agents Chapter 7. Outline Knowledge-based agents Logic in general Propositional (Boolean) logic Equivalence, validity, satisfiability.
Computing & Information Sciences Kansas State University Monday, 25 Sep 2006CIS 490 / 730: Artificial Intelligence Lecture 14 of 42 Monday, 25 September.
For Wednesday Read chapter 9, sections 1-3 Homework: –Chapter 7, exercises 8 and 9.
Propositional Logic Predicate Logic
DEDUCTION PRINCIPLES AND STRATEGIES FOR SEMANTIC WEB Chain resolution and its fuzzyfication Dr. Hashim Habiballa University of Ostrava.
Computing & Information Sciences Kansas State University Lecture 12 of 42 CIS 530 / 730 Artificial Intelligence Lecture 12 of 42 William H. Hsu Department.
First-Order Logic Semantics Reading: Chapter 8, , FOL Syntax and Semantics read: FOL Knowledge Engineering read: FOL.
Computing & Information Sciences Kansas State University Wednesday, 04 Oct 2006CIS 490 / 730: Artificial Intelligence Lecture 17 of 42 Wednesday, 04 October.
Propositional Logic. Assignment Write any five rules each from two games which you like by using propositional logic notations.
Computing & Information Sciences Kansas State University Friday, 13 Oct 2006CIS 490 / 730: Artificial Intelligence Lecture 21 of 42 Friday, 13 October.
Artificial Intelligence Lecture No. 14 Dr. Asad Ali Safi ​ Assistant Professor, Department of Computer Science, COMSATS Institute of Information Technology.
Computing & Information Sciences Kansas State University Monday, 18 Sep 2006CIS 490 / 730: Artificial Intelligence Lecture 11 of 42 Monday, 18 September.
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.
Logic for Knowledge Representation
Knowledge Representation using First-Order Logic
A Brief Summary for Exam 1
MGLAIR Modal Grounded Layered Architecture with Integrated Reasoning
Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation
Propositional Logic CMSC 471 Chapter , 7.7 and Chuck Dyer
Logical and Rule-Based Reasoning Part I
CIS Monthly Seminar – Software Engineering and Knowledge Management IS Enterprise Modeling Ontologies Presenter : Dr. S. Vasanthapriyan Senior Lecturer.
Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation
Presentation transcript:

A Logic of Arbitrary and Indefinite Objects Stuart C. Shapiro Department of Computer Science and Engineering, and Center for Cognitive Science University at Buffalo, The State University of New York 201 Bell Hall, Buffalo, NY

January, 2005S. C. Shapiro2 Based On Stuart C. Shapiro, A Logic of Arbitrary and Indefinite Objects. In D. Dubois, C. Welty, & M. Williams, Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference (KR2004), AAAI Press, Menlo Park, CA, 2004,

January, 2005S. C. Shapiro3 Collaborators Jean-Pierre Koenig David R. Pierce William J. Rapaport The SNePS Research Group

January, 2005S. C. Shapiro4 What Is It? A logic For KRR systems Supporting NL understanding & generation And commonsense reasoning LALA Sound & complete (via translation to Standard FOL) Based on Arbitrary Objects, Fine (’83, ’85a, ’85b) And ANALOG, Ali (’93, ’94), Ali & Shapiro (’93)

January, 2005S. C. Shapiro5 Outline of Talk Introduction and Motivations Informal Introduction to L A with Examples Examples of Proof Theory Implementation as Logic of SNePS 3

January, 2005S. C. Shapiro6 Basic Idea Arbitrary Terms (any x R (x)) Indefinite Terms (some x (y 1 … y n ) R (x))

January, 2005S. C. Shapiro7 Motivation 1 Uniform Syntax Standard FOL ( L s ): Dolly is white. White(Dolly) Every sheep is white.  x(Sheep(x)  White(x)) Some sheep is white.  x(Sheep(x)  White(x))

January, 2005S. C. Shapiro8 Motivation 1 Uniform Syntax FOL with Restricted Quantifiers ( L R ): Dolly is white. White(Dolly) Every sheep is white.  x Sheep White(x) Some sheep is white.  x Sheep White(x)

January, 2005S. C. Shapiro9 Motivation 1 Uniform Syntax L A : Dolly is white. White(Dolly) Every sheep is white. White(any x Sheep(x)) Some sheep is white. White(some x ( ) Sheep(x))

January, 2005S. C. Shapiro10 Motivation 2 Locality of Phrases Every elephant has a trunk. Standard FOL  x(Elephant(x)   y(Trunk(y)  Has(x,y)) L R :  x Elephant  y Trunk Has(x,y))

January, 2005S. C. Shapiro11 Motivation 2 Locality of Phrases Every elephant has a trunk. Logical Form, or FOL with “complex terms” ( L C ): Has(, ) L A : Has(any x Elephant(x), some y (x) Trunk(y))

January, 2005S. C. Shapiro12 Motivation 3 Prospects for Generalized Quantifiers Most elephants have two tusks. Standard FOL ?? L A : Has(most x Elephant(x), two y Tusk(y)) (Currently, just notation.)

January, 2005S. C. Shapiro13 Motivation 4 Structure Sharing any x Elephant(x) some y ( ) Trunk(y) Has(, )Flexible( ) Every elephant has a trunk. It’s flexible. Quantified terms are “conceptually complete”. Fixed semantics (forthcoming).

January, 2005S. C. Shapiro14 Motivation 5 Term Subsumption Hairy(any x Mammal(x)) Mammal(any y Elephant(y))  Hairy(any y Elephant(y)) Pet(some w () Mammal(w))  Hairy(some z () Pet(z)) Hairy Mammal Elephant Pet

January, 2005S. C. Shapiro15 Outline of Talk Introduction and Motivations Informal Introduction to L A with Examples Examples of Proof Theory Implementation as Logic of SNePS 3

January, 2005S. C. Shapiro16 Quantified Terms Arbitrary terms: (any x [ R (x)]) Indefinite terms: (some x ([y 1 … y n ]) [ R (x)])

January, 2005S. C. Shapiro17 (Q v ([a 1 … a n ]) [ R (v)]) (Q u ([a 1 … a n ]) [ R (u)]) (Q v ([a 1 … a n ]) [ R (v)]) Compatible Quantified Terms different or same All quantified terms in an expression must be compatible.

January, 2005S. C. Shapiro18 Quantified Terms in an Expression Must be Compatible Illegal: White(any x Sheep(x))  Black(any x Raven(x)) Legal White(any x Sheep(x))  Black(any y Raven(y)) White(any x Sheep(x))  Black(any x Sheep(x))

January, 2005S. C. Shapiro19 Capture White(any x Sheep(x)) Black(x) White(any x Sheep(x))  Black(x) bound free same Quantifiers take wide scope!

January, 2005S. C. Shapiro20 Examples of Dependency Has(any x Elephant(x), some(y (x) Trunk(y)) Every elephant has (its own) trunk. (any x Number(x)) < (some y (x) Number(y)) Every number has some number bigger than it. (any x Number(x)) < (some y ( ) Number(y)) There’s a number bigger than every number.

January, 2005S. C. Shapiro21 Closure  x …  contains the scope of x Compatibility and capture rules only apply within closures.

January, 2005S. C. Shapiro22 Closure and Negation  White(any x Sheep(x)) Every sheep is not white.   x White(any x Sheep(x))  It is not the case that every sheep is white.  White(some x () Sheep(x)) Some sheep is not white.  x White(some x () Sheep(x))  No sheep is white.

January, 2005S. C. Shapiro23 Closure and Capture Odd(any x Number(x))  Even(x) Every number is odd or even.  x Odd(any x Number(x))    x Even(any x Number(x))  Every number is odd or every number is even.

January, 2005S. C. Shapiro24 Tricky Sentences: Donkey Sentences Every farmer who owns a donkey beats it. Beats(any x Farmer(x)  Owns(x, some y (x) Donkey(y)), y)

January, 2005S. C. Shapiro25 Tricky Sentences: Branching Quantifiers Some relative of each villager and some relative of each townsman hate each other. Hates(some x (any v Villager(v)) Relative(x,v), some y (any u Townsman(u)) Relative(y,u))

January, 2005S. C. Shapiro26 Closure & Nested Beliefs (Assumes Reified Propositions) There is someone whom Mike believes to be a spy. Believes(Mike, Spy(some x ( ) Person(x)) Mike believes that someone is a spy. Believes(Mike,  x Spy(some x ( ) Person(x)  ) There is someone whom Mike believes isn’t a spy. Believes(Mike,  Spy(some x ( ) Person(x)) Mike believes that no one is a spy. Believes(Mike,   x Spy(some x ( ) Person(x)  )

January, 2005S. C. Shapiro27 Outline of Talk Introduction and Motivations Informal Introduction to L A with Examples Examples of Proof Theory Implementation as Logic of SNePS 3

January, 2005S. C. Shapiro28 Proof Theory: anyE (abbreviated) From B (any x A (x)) and A (a) conclude B (a)

January, 2005S. C. Shapiro29 Proof Theory: anyI (abbreviated) From A (a) as Hyp and derive B (a) Conclude B (any x A (x))

January, 2005S. C. Shapiro30 Example Proof From Every woman is a person. Every doctor is a professional. Some child of every person all of whose sons are professionals is busy. Conclude Some child of every woman all of whose sons are doctors is busy. [Based on an example of W. A. Woods]

January, 2005S. C. Shapiro31 Example Proof 1.Person(any x Woman(x)) 2.Professional(any y Doctor(y)) 3.Busy(some u (v) childOf(u, any v Person(v)  Professional(any w sonOf(w,v)))) 4.Woman(a)Hyp 5.Doctor(any z sonOf(z,a)) Hyp 6.Person(a)anyE,1,4 7.Professional(any z sonOf(z,a))anyE,2,6 8.Busy(some u ( ) childOf(u,a))anyE3,6  7 9.Busy(some u (v) childOf(u, any v Woman(v)  Doctor(any w sonOf(w,v)))) anyI,4  5—8 QED

January, 2005S. C. Shapiro32 Syllogistic Reasoning as Subsumption (Derived Rules of Inference) Barbara: From A (any x B (x)) and B (any y C (y)) conclude A (any y C (y))

January, 2005S. C. Shapiro33 Syllogistic Reasoning as Subsumption (Derived Rules of Inference) Darii: From A (any x B (x)) and C (some y φ B (y)) conclude A (some y φ C (y))

January, 2005S. C. Shapiro34 Outline of Talk Introduction and Motivations Informal Introduction to L A with Examples Examples of Proof Theory Implementation as Logic of SNePS 3

January, 2005S. C. Shapiro35 Current Implementation Status Partially implemented as the logic of SNePS 3

January, 2005S. C. Shapiro36 SNePS 3 Example snepsul(25): #L#!(build object (any x (build member x class Mammal)) property hairy) Is((any Arb1 Isa(Arb1, Mammal)), hairy) snepsul(26): #L#!(build member (any y (build member y class Elephant)) class Mammal) Isa((any Arb2 Isa(Arb2, Elephant)), Mammal) snepsul(27): #L#?(build object (any y (build member y class Elephant)) property hairy) Is((any Arb2 Isa(Arb2, Elephant)), hairy) snepsul(28): #L#!(build member Clyde class Elephant) Isa(Clyde, Elephant) snepsul(29): #L#?(build object Clyde property hairy) Is(Clyde, hairy)

January, 2005S. C. Shapiro37 Summary L A is A logic For KRR systems Supporting NL understanding & generation And commonsense reasoning Uses arbitrary and indefinite terms Instead of universally and existentially quantified variables.

January, 2005S. C. Shapiro38 Arbitrary & Indefinite Terms Provide for uniform syntax Promote locality of phrases Provide prospects for generalized quantifiers Are conceptually complete Allow structure sharing Support subsumption reasoning.

January, 2005S. C. Shapiro39 Closure Contains wide-scoping of quantified terms

January, 2005S. C. Shapiro40 Implementation Status Partially implemented as the logic of SNePS 3

January, 2005S. C. Shapiro41 For More Information The SNePS Research Group web site: The SNePS 3 Project page: