Moving Toward Common Logic (CLIF) and standard FOPL (quantificational logic) versions of BFO 2.0 Randall R. Dipert University at Buffalo "Interim Chair,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Artificial Intelligence
Advertisements

Automated Theorem Proving Lecture 1. Program verification is undecidable! Given program P and specification S, does P satisfy S?
SCL: A Logic Standard for Semantic Integration Christopher Menzel Philosophy Department Texas A&M University
CS4026 Formal Models of Computation Part II The Logic Model Lecture 1 – Programming in Logic.
Three Theses of Representation in the Semantic Web
CHAPTER 2 GC101 Program’s algorithm 1. COMMUNICATING WITH A COMPUTER  Programming languages bridge the gap between human thought processes and computer.
1 Logic Logic in general is a subfield of philosophy and its development is credited to ancient Greeks. Symbolic or mathematical logic is used in AI. In.
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.
F22H1 Logic and Proof Week 7 Clausal Form and Resolution.
ISBN Chapter 3 Describing Syntax and Semantics.
1 Semantic Description of Programming languages. 2 Static versus Dynamic Semantics n Static Semantics represents legal forms of programs that cannot be.
CS 355 – Programming Languages
Formal Logic Proof Methods Direct Proof / Natural Deduction Conditional Proof (Implication Introduction) Reductio ad Absurdum Resolution Refutation.
9/28/98 Prof. Richard Fikes First-Order Logic Knowledge Interchange Format (KIF) Computer Science Department Stanford University CS222 Fall 1998.
Working with JavaScript. 2 Objectives Introducing JavaScript Inserting JavaScript into a Web Page File Writing Output to the Web Page Working with Variables.
From Chapter 4 Formal Specification using Z David Lightfoot
Programming Languages Structure
Some administrative stuff Class mailing list: –send to with the command “subscribe”
Describing Syntax and Semantics
Programming Languages Third Edition Chapter 12 Formal Semantics.
Information Extraction from Documents for Automating Softwre Testing by Patricia Lutsky Presented by Ramiro Lopez.
1 Consistency Checking of Semantic Web Ontologies Kenneth Baclawski, Northeastern U. & VIS Mieczyslaw M. Kokar, Northeastern U. & VIS Richard Waldinger,
Predicates and Quantifiers
Verification and Validation Yonsei University 2 nd Semester, 2014 Sanghyun Park.
Knowledge Interchange Format Michael Gruninger National Institute of Standards and Technology
CISC 2315 Discrete Structures Professor William G. Tanner, Jr. Fall 2010 Slides created by James L. Hein, author of Discrete Structures, Logic, and Computability,
Ontologies Reasoning Components Agents Simulations Belief Update, Planning and the Fluent Calculus Jacques Robin.
Math 3121 Abstract Algebra I Section 0: Sets. The axiomatic approach to Mathematics The notion of definition - from the text: "It is impossible to define.
Chapter 10: Compilers and Language Translation Invitation to Computer Science, Java Version, Third Edition.
Introduction of C++ language. C++ Predecessors Early high level languages or programming languages were written to address a particular kind of computing.
LDK R Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation Modeling First version by Alessandro Agostini and Fausto Giunchiglia Second version by Fausto Giunchiglia.
Input, Output, and Processing
Chapter 8 Relational Calculus. Copyright © 2004 Pearson Addison-Wesley. All rights reserved.8-2 Topics in this Chapter Tuple Calculus Calculus vs. Algebra.
Declarative vs Procedural Programming  Procedural programming requires that – the programmer tell the computer what to do. That is, how to get the output.
Chapter 1, Part II: Predicate Logic With Question/Answer Animations.
CMPF144 FUNDAMENTALS OF COMPUTING THEORY Module 5: Classical Logic.
The Bernays-Schönfinkel Fragment of First-Order Autoepistemic Logic Peter Baumgartner MPI Informatik, Saarbrücken.
Logic CL4 Episode 16 0 The language of CL4 The rules of CL4 CL4 as a conservative extension of classical logic The soundness and completeness of CL4 The.
CISC 2315 Discrete Structures Professor William G. Tanner, Jr. Spring 2011 Slides created by James L. Hein, author of Discrete Structures, Logic, and Computability,
ISBN Chapter 3 Describing Semantics -Attribute Grammars -Dynamic Semantics.
CS621: Artificial Intelligence Pushpak Bhattacharyya CSE Dept., IIT Bombay Lecture 28– Interpretation; Herbrand Interpertation 30 th Sept, 2010.
Chapter 1, Part II: Predicate Logic With Question/Answer Animations.
Computer Engineering Rabie A. Ramadan Lecture 5.
3.2 Semantics. 2 Semantics Attribute Grammars The Meanings of Programs: Semantics Sebesta Chapter 3.
ISBN Chapter 3 Describing Semantics.
Chapter 3 Part II Describing Syntax and Semantics.
Programming Languages and Design Lecture 3 Semantic Specifications of Programming Languages Instructor: Li Ma Department of Computer Science Texas Southern.
Chapter 3 Syntax, Errors, and Debugging Fundamentals of Java.
Automated Reasoning Early AI explored how to automated several reasoning tasks – these were solved by what we might call weak problem solving methods as.
CS6133 Software Specification and Verification
DL Overview Second Pass Ming Fang 06/19/2009. Outlines  Description Languages  Knowledge Representation in DL  Logical Inference in DL.
- 1 -  P. Marwedel, Univ. Dortmund, Informatik 12, 05/06 Universität Dortmund Validation - Formal verification -
CSE Winter 2008 Introduction to Program Verification January 15 tautology checking.
CS 285- Discrete Mathematics Lecture 4. Section 1.3 Predicate logic Predicate logic is an extension of propositional logic that permits concisely reasoning.
ece 627 intelligent web: ontology and beyond
Knowledge Repn. & Reasoning Lec. #5: First-Order Logic UIUC CS 498: Section EA Professor: Eyal Amir Fall Semester 2004.
Chapter 7. Propositional and Predicate Logic Fall 2013 Comp3710 Artificial Intelligence Computing Science Thompson Rivers University.
We will now study some special kinds of non-standard quantifiers. Definition 4. Let  (x),  (x) be two fixed formulae of a language L n such that x is.
1/20 Arrays Changki PSWLAB Arrays Daniel Kroening and Ofer Strichman Decision Procedure.
EEL 5937 Content languages EEL 5937 Multi Agent Systems Lecture 10, Feb. 6, 2003 Lotzi Bölöni.
CENG 424-Logic for CS Introduction Based on the Lecture Notes of Konstantin Korovin, Valentin Goranko, Russel and Norvig, and Michael Genesereth.
Describing Syntax and Semantics
Chapter 7. Propositional and Predicate Logic
3. The Logic of Quantified Statements Summary
Introduction to Logic for Artificial Intelligence Lecture 2
CS 8532: Advanced Software Engineering
Chapter 7. Propositional and Predicate Logic
Predicates and Quantifiers
This Lecture Substitution model
Motivation for Language Specification
Presentation transcript:

Moving Toward Common Logic (CLIF) and standard FOPL (quantificational logic) versions of BFO 2.0 Randall R. Dipert University at Buffalo "Interim Chair, Working Group for First Order Logic Versions of BFO 2.0"

CLIF/FOPL Version of BFO 2.0 At BFO 2.0 Specification (04/02/2013), 0.1: "While we have attempted to produce OWL, FOL and CLIF files reflecting the current BFO2 specification document, there may be issues or bugs that will be fixed in subsequent releases."

CLIF/FOPL Version of BFO 2.0 At end of summer 2012: This group and others (but mainly Mark Ressler) produced: Common Logic Interchange Format (CLIF) version of BFO 2.0 Source TeX file of FOPL version in standard logical notation PDF version of FOPL version in standard logical notation (TeX output)

CLIF/FOPL Version of BFO 2.0 FOPL excerpt:

CLIF/FOPL Version of BFO 2.0 CLIF excerpt (beginning of file): /* [...] \section{Formalization} BFO-FOL is an extension of classical first-order formal logic with identity. It can be represented using any standard axiomatization of the logical calculus. The formalization presented here uses the following symbols for negation, conjunction, disjunction, material implication, biconditional implication, universal and particular quantification, respectively: ${\neg,}\ {\wedge,}\ {\vee,}\ {\supset,}\ {\equiv,}\ {\forall,}\ {\exists}$. \section{Predicates} The predicates of BFO-FOL are divided into categorial predicates, which are intended to represent categories or universals, and relational predicates, which are intended to represent relations that hold between individuals within those categories. [...] \subsection{Primitive Categorial Predicates} The following categorial predicates are taken as primitive: \begin{description} \item[Entity(a)] --- Intended interpretation: ``$a$ is an entity''. [ ] \item[Continuant(a)] --- ``$a$ is a continuant''. [ ] \item[MaterialEntity(a)] --- ``$a$ is a material entity''. [ ] \item[Object(a)] --- ``$a$ is an object''. [ ] [...] \end{description}

CLIF/FOPL Version of BFO 2.0 CLIF excerpt (beginning of file): % NOTE: CLIF does not seem to have specific support for defined predicates, so % for the defined predicates below, '\equiv' should be replaced by the % defined '\DF' command for the final LaTeX compilation, but only in the % defined predicates sections. Further, the letter arguments should be % replaced by their Greek equivalents, e.g. 'a' replaced by '$\alpha$' % to make clear that these arguments are used in definitional schemata, % not as individual names in the system.

CLIF/FOPL Version of BFO 2.0 CLIF excerpt (excerpt of CLIF content): /* \item[ImmaterialEntity(a)] --- ``$a$ is an immaterial entity''. [ ] [RD:] a is an Immaterial entity if and only if a is an independent continuant and there does not exist a material entity b and a t such that b is a continuant-part of a at [time] t. */ (iff (ImmaterialEntity a) (and (IndependentContinuant a) (not (exists (b t) (and (MaterialEntity b) (continuantPartOfAt b a t)))))))

CLIF/FOPL Version of BFO 2.0 CLIF (excerpt of CLIF content): \subsection{Defined Categorial Predicates} The following categorial predicates are defined as indicated: \begin{description} \item[IndependentContinuant(a)] --- ``$a$ is an independent continuant''. [ ] [RD: a is an independent continuant if and only if a is an independent continuant and it is not the case that there exists a [continuant] b such that a specifically depends on b at [time] t. ] */ (iff (IndependentContinuant a) (and (Continuant a) (not (exists (b t) (specificallyDependsOnAt a b t)))))

Issues and Tentative Proposals (RD) Issue 1Organizational Problems Proposal: Organization of Two Committees to revise/approve FOL/CLIF version of BFO 2.0 A.Voting Committee (3): R. Dipert F. Neuhaus C. Mungle B.Consulting Committee: B. AndersenP. GrenonA. Ruttenberg T. BittnerB. Horgan... M. BrochhausenL. Jacuzzo C. Hired graduate student help.

Issues and Tentative Proposals (RD) Issue 2: OWL FOL/CLIF differences E.g. To:(iff (IndependentContinuant a) (and (Continuant a) (not (exists (b t) (specificallyDependsOnAt a b t))))) Add: (the "range"—co-domain of third argument position--of specificallyDependsOnAt) (forall (a b t) (if(specificallyDependsOnAt a b t) (TemporalEntity t ) ) )  a,b,t (specificallyDependsOnAt(a, b, t)  TemporalEntity(t) ) Where: (iff(TemporalEntity t) (or(TemporalInstant t) (TemporalInterval t) ) )

Issues and Tentative Proposals (RD) Issue 3 CommentsNow: unread by CLIF processor %...Ignore rest of line /*... */Ignore multiline section Proposal A:Use CLIF:(cl:comment...) Proposal B:Structure commentsE.g., (cl: comment '(Definition [28-001] Vers.04/02/2013)' )

Issues and Tentative Proposals (RD) Issue 4 Definitions Now: FOPL CLIF: (iff(DefinedPred FreeVar1 FreeVar2) ( forall/exists (Var3... ) FreeVar1 FreeVar2 Var3...> ] Proposal:(def-iff... ) +Parsing tool/translator to replace ‘def-iff’ with ‘iff’ Also:Leave Var1 Var2... [in Defined Expression] unquantified. Quantify them if pure FOPL desired. Problem: variable vs individual constant.

Issues and Tentative Proposals (RD) Issue 5a: Lack of Theorem Provers or Reasoners As of 5/1/2013: No "native" CLIF logical tools. Translate into notation for: Prover9 Isabelle SNARK (KIF)... HETS Project (University of Bremen) Heterogeneous Tool Set Chris Mungall's Prolog code

Issues and Tentative Proposals (RD) Issue 5a (continued)

Issues and Tentative Proposals (RD) Issue 5b Grammar and consistency checking.

Issues and Tentative Proposals (RD) Pause for Questions/Clarification Issues: 1.Organization of effort. 2.OWL/CLIF-FOPL differences 3.Comments 4.Definitions 5. Logical tools: theorem provers, reasoning, consistency and grammar checking, independence of axioms

Issues and Tentative Proposals (RD) Issue 6 Develop Lemmon-style Natural Deduction Theorem Prover

Issues and Tentative Proposals (RD) Issue 7 Move BFO 2.0 from a relatively trivial axiom/definition set to a robust one: Add mereology in CLIF (Gruninger, Bittner) Add a time calculus (Allen), agnostic about continuous vs dense/discrete

Issues and Tentative Proposals (RD) Issue 8 Reduce or "bracket off" axiom that induce problems with computational tractability (a) Decidability: Use only decidable fragments of FOPL (b) Reduce computational Complexity i.Use guarded/restricted quantifiers (or multi-sorted). ii. More careful introduction of 2-place and 2+ place relations

Issues and Tentative Proposals (RD) Issue 9 BFO 2.0 specification has changed since April Revise CLIF and standard FOPL versions Carefully examine specification for: a.ambiguities/lack of specificity b."Gaps" (missing axioms) Automate page number references

Issues and Tentative Proposals (RD) Issue 10 Develop tools for manipulating a "higher order" language, e.g. Prolog-CLIF Generates FOPL (Done) Generates correctly formatted TeX FOPL Generates CLIF (Done) Generates formulas for Prover9 etc. [or use a tool like HETS] Converts into variants with different features, e.g.allows free variables in definitions, 'def-iff' becomes 'iff', etc.

Issues and Tentative Proposals (RD) Pause for Questions/Clarification Issues: 6.Natural Deduction Theorem Provers/reasoners 7.Add mereology, calculus of time 8.Issues of computational complexity 9.Update FOPL/CLIF versions to current specification of BFO Develop wide array of tools.