© Daniel S. Weld 1 573 Topics Agency Problem Spaces SearchKnowledge Representation Planning PerceptionNLPMulti-agentRobotics Uncertainty MDPs Supervised.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Resolution Proof System for First Order Logic
Advertisements

First-Order Logic.
Inference Rules Universal Instantiation Existential Generalization
Standard Logical Equivalences
UIUC CS 497: Section EA Lecture #2 Reasoning in Artificial Intelligence Professor: Eyal Amir Spring Semester 2004.
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.
Artificial Intelligence Inference in first-order logic Fall 2008 professor: Luigi Ceccaroni.
Methods of Proof Chapter 7, second half.. Proof methods Proof methods divide into (roughly) two kinds: Application of inference rules: Legitimate (sound)
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.
Propositional Logic CMSC 471 Chapter , 7.7 and Chuck Dyer
Methods of Proof Chapter 7, Part II. Proof methods Proof methods divide into (roughly) two kinds: Application of inference rules: Legitimate (sound) generation.
Logic.
Outline Recap Knowledge Representation I Textbook: Chapters 6, 7, 9 and 10.
Proof methods Proof methods divide into (roughly) two kinds: –Application of inference rules Legitimate (sound) generation of new sentences from old Proof.
Inference in FOL Copyright, 1996 © Dale Carnegie & Associates, Inc. Chapter 9 Spring 2004.
Inference and Resolution for Problem Solving
Knowledge Representation I (Propositional Logic) CSE 473.
CSE 473 Artificial Intelligence Review. © Daniel S. Weld 2 Logistics Problem Set due at midnight Exam next Wed 8:30—10:30 Regular classroom Closed book.
Knowledge Representation III First-Order Logic
Knoweldge Representation & Reasoning
Inference in First-Order Logic
1 Soundness and Completeness zKB |- S: S is provable from KB. zA proof procedure is sound if: yIf KB |- S, then KB |= S. yThat is, the procedure produces.
Knowledge Representation II (Inference in Propositional Logic) CSE 473.
Predicate Calculus.
Knowledge Representation IV Inference in First-Order Logic CSE 473.
Propositional Logic Agenda: Other forms of inference in propositional logic Basics of First Order Logic (FOL) Vision Final Homework now posted on web site.
Logic - Part 2 CSE 573. © Daniel S. Weld 2 Reading Already assigned R&N ch 5, 7, 8, 11 thru 11.2 For next time R&N 9.1, 9.2, 11.4 [optional 11.5]
Propositional Logic Reasoning correctly computationally Chapter 7 or 8.
Ming Fang 6/12/2009. Outlines  Classical logics  Introduction to DL  Syntax of DL  Semantics of DL  KR in DL  Reasoning in DL  Applications.
UIUC CS 497: Section EA Lecture #3 Reasoning in Artificial Intelligence Professor: Eyal Amir Spring Semester 2004.
Knowledge Representation IV Inference for First-Order Logic CSE 473.
Pattern-directed inference systems
Logical Agents Logic Propositional Logic Summary
Propositional Logic Dr. Rogelio Dávila Pérez Profesor-Investigador División de Posgrado Universidad Autónoma Guadalajara
Logic in AI CSE 573. © Daniel S. Weld 2 Logistics Monday? Reading Ch 8 Ch 9 thru p 278 Section 10.3 Projects Due 11/10 Teams and project plan due by this.
CS Introduction to AI Tutorial 8 Resolution Tutorial 8 Resolution.
Dr. Muhammed Al-Mulhem ICS An Introduction to Logical Programming.
Logical Agents Chapter 7. Knowledge bases Knowledge base (KB): set of sentences in a formal language Inference: deriving new sentences from the KB. E.g.:
Computing & Information Sciences Kansas State University Lecture 14 of 42 CIS 530 / 730 Artificial Intelligence Lecture 14 of 42 William H. Hsu Department.
Automated Reasoning Early AI explored how to automated several reasoning tasks – these were solved by what we might call weak problem solving methods as.
Logical Agents Chapter 7. Outline Knowledge-based agents Logic in general Propositional (Boolean) logic Equivalence, validity, satisfiability.
CSE 473 Propositional Logic SAT Algorithms Dan Weld (With some slides from Mausam, Stuart Russell, Dieter Fox, Henry Kautz, Min-Yen Kan…) Irrationally.
CS6133 Software Specification and Verification
1 The Wumpus Game StenchBreeze Stench Gold Breeze StenchBreeze Start  Breeze.
For Wednesday Read chapter 9, sections 1-3 Homework: –Chapter 7, exercises 8 and 9.
For Friday Read chapter 8 Homework: –Chapter 7, exercises 2 and 10 Program 1, Milestone 2 due.
© Copyright 2008 STI INNSBRUCK Intelligent Systems Propositional Logic.
© Daniel S. Weld 1 Logistics Problem Set 2 Due Wed A few KR problems Robocode 1.Form teams of 2 people 2.Write design document.
CSCI 5582 Fall 2006 CSCI 5582 Artificial Intelligence Lecture 11 Jim Martin.
First-Order Logic Daniel Weld CSE 473 Spring 2012.
Knowledge Repn. & Reasoning Lec. #5: First-Order Logic UIUC CS 498: Section EA Professor: Eyal Amir Fall Semester 2004.
Reasoning with Propositional Logic automated processing of a simple knowledge base CD.
First-Order Logic Reading: C. 8 and C. 9 Pente specifications handed back at end of class.
Computing & Information Sciences Kansas State University Lecture 12 of 42 CIS 530 / 730 Artificial Intelligence Lecture 12 of 42 William H. Hsu Department.
1-1 An Introduction to Logical Programming Sept
1 Propositional Logic Limits The expressive power of propositional logic is limited. The assumption is that everything can be expressed by simple facts.
First-Order Logic Semantics Reading: Chapter 8, , FOL Syntax and Semantics read: FOL Knowledge Engineering read: FOL.
Instructor: Eyal Amir Grad TAs: Wen Pu, Yonatan Bisk Undergrad TAs: Sam Johnson, Nikhil Johri CS 440 / ECE 448 Introduction to Artificial Intelligence.
Logical Agents Chapter 7. Outline Knowledge-based agents Propositional (Boolean) logic Equivalence, validity, satisfiability Inference rules and theorem.
Instructor: Eyal Amir Grad TAs: Wen Pu, Yonatan Bisk Undergrad TAs: Sam Johnson, Nikhil Johri CS 440 / ECE 448 Introduction to Artificial Intelligence.
Knowledge Repn. & Reasoning Lecture #9: Propositional Logic UIUC CS 498: Section EA Professor: Eyal Amir Fall Semester 2005.
Logical Agents. Outline Knowledge-based agents Logic in general - models and entailment Propositional (Boolean) logic Equivalence, validity, satisfiability.
CENG 424-Logic for CS Introduction Based on the Lecture Notes of Konstantin Korovin, Valentin Goranko, Russel and Norvig, and Michael Genesereth.
Knowledge Representation III First-Order Logic
The Propositional Calculus
Knowledge Representation II
First-Order Logic CSE 573 A handful of GENERAL SEARCH TECHNIQUES lie at the heart of practically all work in AI We will encounter the SAME PRINCIPLES again.
Knowledge Representation III First-Order Logic
PROPOSITIONAL LOGIC - SYNTAX-
Knowledge Representation I (Propositional Logic)
Presentation transcript:

© Daniel S. Weld Topics Agency Problem Spaces SearchKnowledge Representation Planning PerceptionNLPMulti-agentRobotics Uncertainty MDPs Supervised Learning Reinforcement Learning Expressiveness Tractability

© Daniel S. Weld 2 KR Propositional logic Syntax (CNF, Horn clauses, …) Semantics (Truth Tables) Inference (FC, Resolution, DPLL, WalkSAT) First-order logic Syntax (quantifiers, skolem functions, … Semantics (Interpretations) Inference (FC, Resolution, Compilation) Frame systems Two theses… Representing events, action & change    

© Daniel S. Weld 3 Propositional. Logic vs. First Order Ontology Syntax Semantics Inference Algorithm Complexity Objects, Properties, Relations Atomic sentences Connectives Variables & quantification Sentences have structure: terms father-of(mother-of(X))) Unification Forward, Backward chaining Prolog, theorem proving DPLL, GSAT Fast in practice Semi-decidableNP-Complete Facts (P, Q) Interpretations (Much more complicated) Truth Tables

© Daniel S. Weld 4 FOL Definitions Constants: a,b, dog33. Name a specific object. Variables: X, Y. Refer to an object without naming it. Functions: dad-of Mapping from objects to objects. Terms: dad-of(dog33) Refer to objects Atomic Sentences: in(dad-of(dog33), food6) Can be true or false Correspond to propositional symbols P, Q

© Daniel S. Weld 5 More Definitions Logical connectives: and, or, not, => Quantifiers:  Forall  There exists Examples Dumbo is grey Elephants are grey There is a grey elephant

© Daniel S. Weld 6 Quantifier / Connective Interaction 1.  x E(x)  G(x) 2.  x E(x)  G(x) 3.  x E(x)  G(x) 4.  x E(x)  G(x) E(x) == “x is an elephant” G(x) == “x has the color grey”

© Daniel S. Weld 7 Nested Quantifiers: Order matters! Examples Every dog has a tail  x  y P(x,y)   y  x P(x,y)  d  t has(d,t) Someone is loved by everyone  t  d has(d,t) ?  x  y loves(y, x) Every dog shares a tail!

© Daniel S. Weld 8 Semantics Syntax: a description of the legal arrangements of symbols (Def “sentences”) Semantics: what the arrangement of symbols means in the world Sentences Facts Sentences Representation World Semantics Inference

© Daniel S. Weld 9 Propositional Logic: SEMANTICS “Interpretation” (or “possible world”) Specifically, TRUTH TABLES Assignment to each variable either T or F Assignment of T or F to each connective via defns P T T F F Q P  Q T FF F Mapping from vars  T/F

© Daniel S. Weld 10 Models Depiction of one possible model

© Daniel S. Weld 11 Interpretations=Mappings syntactic tokens  model elements Depiction of one possible interpretation, assuming Constants: Functions: Relations: Richard JohnLeg(p,l)On(x,y) King(p)

© Daniel S. Weld 12 Interpretations=Mappings syntactic tokens  model elements Another interpretation, same assumptions Constants: Functions: Relations: Richard JohnLeg(p,l)On(x,y) King(p)

© Daniel S. Weld 13 Satisfiability, Validity, & Entailment S is valid if it is true in all interpretations S is satisfiable if it is true in some interp S is unsatisfiable if it is false all interps S1 entails S2 if forall interps where S1 is true, S2 is also true |=

© Daniel S. Weld 14 Skolemization Existential quantifiers aren’t necessary! Existential variables can be replaced by Skolem functions (or constants) Args to function are all surrounding  vars  d  t has(d, t)  x  y loves(y, x)  d has(d, f(d) )  y loves(y, f() )  y loves(y, f97 )

© Daniel S. Weld 15 FOL Reasoning FO Forward & Backward Chaining FO Resolution Many other types of theorem proving Restricted representations Description logics Compilation to SAT

© Daniel S. Weld 16 Forward Chaining Given  ?x lifeform(?x) => mortal(?x)  ?x mammal(?x) => lifeform(?x)  ?x dog(?x) => mammal(?x) dog(fido) Prove mortal(fido)  ?x dog(?x) => mammal(?x) dog(fido) mammal(fido) ?

© Daniel S. Weld 17 Unification Emphasize variables with ? Useful for FO inference (modus ponens, …) Also for compilation of FOPC -> propositional Unify(x, y) returns mgu Unify(city(?a), city(kent)) returns ?a/kent Substitute(expr, mapping) returns new expr Substitute(connected(?a, ?b), {?a/kent}) returns connected(kent, ?b)

© Daniel S. Weld 18 Unification Examples Unify(road(?a, kent), road(seattle, ?b)) Unify(road(?a, ?a), road(seattle, kent)) Unify(f(g(?x, dog), ?y)), f(g(cat, ?y), dog) Unify(f(g(?x)), f(?x))

© Daniel S. Weld 19 First-Order Resolution Is it the case that  |=  ? Method Let =    Convert to clausal form Standardize variables Move quantifiers to front, skolemize to remove  Replace  with  and  Demorgan’s laws... Resolve until get empty clause

© Daniel S. Weld 20 Example Given  ?x man(?x) => mortal(?x)  ?x woman(?x) => mortal(?x)  ?x person(?x) => man(?x)  woman(?x) person(kelly) Prove mortal(kelly) [  m(?x),d(?x)] [  w(?y), d(?y)] [  p(?z),m(?z),w(?z)] [p (k)][  d(k)]

© Daniel S. Weld 21 Example Continued [  m(?x),d(?x)] [  w(?y), d(?y)] [  p(?z),m(?z),w(?z)] [p (k)] [  d(k)] [m(k),w(k)] [w(k), d(k)] [] [w(k)] [d(k)]

© Daniel S. Weld 22 KR with Description Logics Tbox Term Defs Assertions fathermother person grandmother Abox mother(jane) child-of(jane, bob) …

© Daniel S. Weld 23 Tbox Term definitions FO Language + inference organized into a taxonomy, e.g: father(x) = person(x)  male(x)   y childof(y,x) parent(x) = person(x)   y childof(y,x) Complexity of classifying new terms subsumption fathermother person grandmother Subsumption hierarchy 

© Daniel S. Weld 24 Abox Assertions Abox – separate language + inference for “propositional” assertions using Tbox terms e.g. person(kelley)

© Daniel S. Weld 25 Debate Restricted language thesis Disjunction, negation, particularization, order… Natural kinds Restricted classification thesis Concepts using contingent information: Treatable disease, democratic country, illegal act Counterargument Constructs: Omit vs limit Completeness Efficiency

© Daniel S. Weld 26 Compilation to Prop. Logic I Typed Logic  city a,b connected(a,b) Universe Cities: seattle, tacoma, enumclaw Equivalent propositional formula:

© Daniel S. Weld 27 Compilation to Prop. Logic II Universe Cities: seattle, tacoma, enumclaw Firms: IBM, Microsoft, Boeing First-Order formula  city c  firm f hasHQ(c, f) Equivalent propositional formula