Chapter Nine Predicate Logic Proofs. 1. Proving Validity The eighteen valid argument forms plus CP and IP that are the proof machinery of sentential logic.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Inference Rules Universal Instantiation Existential Generalization
Advertisements

The Foundations: Logic and Proofs
Resolution.
CPSC 121: Models of Computation Unit 6 Rewriting Predicate Logic Statements Based on slides by Patrice Belleville and Steve Wolfman.
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.
Chapter 1: The Foundations: Logic and Proofs 1.1 Propositional Logic 1.2 Propositional Equivalences 1.3 Predicates and Quantifiers 1.4 Nested Quantifiers.
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.
Mr Barton’s Maths Notes
Today’s Topics Introduction to Predicate Logic Venn Diagrams Categorical Syllogisms Venn Diagram tests for validity Rule tests for validity.
Truth Trees Intermediate Logic.
Proofs in Predicate Logic A rule of inference applies only if the main operator of the line is the right main operator. So if the line is a simple statement,
Discussion #17 1/15 Discussion #17 Derivations. Discussion #17 2/15 Topics Derivations  proofs in predicate calculus Inference Rules with Quantifiers.
Formal Logic Proof Methods Direct Proof / Natural Deduction Conditional Proof (Implication Introduction) Reductio ad Absurdum Resolution Refutation.
Inference in FOL Copyright, 1996 © Dale Carnegie & Associates, Inc. Chapter 9 Spring 2004.
Inference and Resolution for Problem Solving
Today’s Topics n Review Logical Implication & Truth Table Tests for Validity n Truth Value Analysis n Short Form Validity Tests n Consistency and validity.
Reading: Chapter 4, section 4 Nongraded Homework: Problems at the end of section 4. Graded Homework #4 is due at the beginning of class on Friday. You.
Proof by Deduction. Deductions and Formal Proofs A deduction is a sequence of logic statements, each of which is known or assumed to be true A formal.
1 Topic Mathematical Proofs. 2 Topic Mathematical Proofs California Standards: 24.2 Students identify the hypothesis and conclusion in logical.
Section 1.3: Predicates and Quantifiers
Proofs in Predicate Logic A rule of inference applies only if the main operator of the line is the right main operator. So if the line is a simple statement,
Chapter 1 Equations, Inequalities, and Mathematical Models
 Predicate: A sentence that contains a finite number of variables and becomes a statement when values are substituted for the variables. ◦ Domain: the.
Week 2 - Friday.  What did we talk about last time?  Predicate logic  Negation  Multiple quantifiers.
1 Chapter 8 Inference and Resolution for Problem Solving.
Extending the Definition of Exponents © Math As A Second Language All Rights Reserved next #10 Taking the Fear out of Math 2 -8.
F22H1 Logic and Proof Week 6 Reasoning. How can we show that this is a tautology (section 11.2): The hard way: “logical calculation” The “easy” way: “reasoning”
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.
Chapter Three Truth Tables 1. Computing Truth-Values We can use truth tables to determine the truth-value of any compound sentence containing one of.
6.3 Separation of Variables and the Logistic Equation.
1 Predicate (Relational) Logic 1. Introduction The propositional logic is not powerful enough to express certain types of relationship between propositions.
CS Introduction to AI Tutorial 8 Resolution Tutorial 8 Resolution.
Hazırlayan DISCRETE COMPUTATIONAL STRUCTURES Propositional Logic PROF. DR. YUSUF OYSAL.
Today’s Topics Introduction to Proofs Rules of Inference Rules of Equivalence.
Chapter Five Conditional and Indirect Proofs. 1. Conditional Proofs A conditional proof is a proof in which we assume the truth of one of the premises.
Automated Reasoning Early AI explored how to automated several reasoning tasks – these were solved by what we might call weak problem solving methods as.
Automated Reasoning Early AI explored how to automate several reasoning tasks – these were solved by what we might call weak problem solving methods as.
assumption procedures
Natural Deduction for Predicate Logic Bound Variable: A variable within the scope of a quantifier. – (x) Px – (  y) (Zy · Uy) – (z) (Mz  ~Nz) Free Variable:
Proofs in Predicate Calculus
2. 1. G > T 2. (T v S) > K / G > K (G v H) > (S. T) 2. (T v U) > (C. D) / G > C A > ~(A v E) / A > F H > (I > N) 2. (H > ~I) > (M v N)
Chapter Twelve Predicate Logic Truth Trees. 1. Introductory Remarks The trees for sentential logic give us decidability—there is a mechanical decision.
Chapter 17: Missing Premises and Conclusions. Enthymemes (p. 168) An enthymeme is an argument with an unstated premise or conclusion. There are systematic.
Week 2 - Wednesday.  What did we talk about last time?  Arguments  Digital logic circuits  Predicate logic  Universal quantifier  Existential quantifier.
Week 4 - Friday.  What did we talk about last time?  Floor and ceiling  Proof by contradiction.
1 Outline Quantifiers and predicates Translation of English sentences Predicate formulas with single variable Predicate formulas involving multiple variables.
Mathematics for Comter I Lecture 3: Logic (2) Propositional Equivalences Predicates and Quantifiers.
Lecture 041 Predicate Calculus Learning outcomes Students are able to: 1. Evaluate predicate 2. Translate predicate into human language and vice versa.
2004/9/15fuzzy set theory chap02.ppt1 Classical Logic the forms of correct reasoning - formal logic.
Chapter Ten Relational Predicate Logic. 1. Relational Predicates We now broaden our coverage of predicate logic to include relational predicates. This.
More Proofs. REVIEW The Rule of Assumption: A Assumption is the easiest rule to learn. It says at any stage in the derivation, we may write down any.
Metalogic Soundness and Completeness. Two Notions of Logical Consequence Validity: If the premises are true, then the conclusion must be true. Provability:
1 Section 7.3 Formal Proofs in Predicate Calculus All proof rules for propositional calculus extend to predicate calculus. Example. … k.  x p(x) P k+1.
Discrete Mathematical Structures: Theory and Applications 1 Logic: Learning Objectives  Learn about statements (propositions)  Learn how to use logical.
Propositional Logic. Assignment Write any five rules each from two games which you like by using propositional logic notations.
Uniqueness Quantifier ROI for Quantified Statement.
March 23 rd. Four Additional Rules of Inference  Constructive Dilemma (CD): (p  q) (r  s) p v r q v s.
Introduction to Logic for Artificial Intelligence Lecture 2
8.1 Symbols and Translation
Rationale Behind the Precise Formulation of the Four Quantifier Rules
Predicate logic CSC 333.
Artificial Intelligence
CS201: Data Structures and Discrete Mathematics I
Mathematical Structures for Computer Science Chapter 1
Computer Security: Art and Science, 2nd Edition
Proofs in Predicate Logic
CS201: Data Structures and Discrete Mathematics I
For Wednesday, read Chapter 4, section 3 (pp )
Subderivations.
Presentation transcript:

Chapter Nine Predicate Logic Proofs

1. Proving Validity The eighteen valid argument forms plus CP and IP that are the proof machinery of sentential logic are incorporated intact into predicate logic. However, for proofs in predicate logic we must introduce four new rules of implication. These rules of implication tell us when taking off quantifiers in justified and when replacing them is justified.

2. The Four Quantifier Rules Universal Instantiation (UI) Universal Generalization (UG) Existential Instantiation (EI) Existential Generalization (EG)

3. The Five Main Restrictions An EI must be done to a quasivariable A quasivariable introduced into a proof by rule EI must not have occurred as a quasivariable previously in the proof. UG cannot be performed on a constant. If a variable is free in an EI line, we cannot use UG to bind that variable. When we make an assumption with a quasivariable, we cannot bind that variable with UG so long as we are relying on the assumption in which it occurs.

4. Precise Formulation of the Four Quantifier Rules Rule UI: (u) (…u…)/Therefore, (…w…) Provided: 1. (…w…) results from replacing each occurrence of u free in (…u…) with a w that is either a constant or a variable free in (…w…) (making no other changes).

Precise Formulation of the Four Quantifier Rules, continued Rule EI: ( ∃ u) (…u…)/Therefore, (…w…) Provided: 1. w is not a constant; 2. w does not occur previously in the proof; 3. (…w…) results from replacing each occurrence of u free in (…u…) with a w that is free in (…w…) (making no other changes).

Precise Formulation of the Four Quantifier Rules, continued Rule UG: (…u…)/Therefore, (w) (…w…) Provided: 1. w is not a constant; 2. u does not occur free previously in a line obtained by EI; 3. u does not occur free previously in an assumed premise that has not yet been discharged; 4. (…w…) results from replacing each occurrence of u free in (…u…) with a w that is free in (…w…) (making no other changes) and there are no additional free occurrences of w already contained in (…w…)

Precise Formulation of the Four Quantifier Rules, continued Rule EG: (…u…)/Therefore, ( ∃ w) (…w…) Provided: 1. (…w…) results from replacing at least one occurrence of u, where u is a constant or a variable free in (…u…) with a w that is free in (...w…) (making no other changes), and there are no additional free occurrences of w already contained in (…w…).

5. Mastering the Four Quantifier Rules Do not try to do two things at once, such as change bound x’s to free x’s and y’s, bind both an x and a y at once, and so on. Do not violate the two restrictions having to do with constants. When using EI, check to make sure that the variable we are introducing does not occur free on any earlier line. When using UG, check to make sure that the variable we are binding is not free in an EI line or an undischarged assumed premise.

Mastering the Four Quantifier Rules, continued If you must use EI, do so as soon as possible. Remember: These rules are to be applied to whole lines of proofs only!

6. Quantifier Negation The four other inference rules to be introduced into our predicate logic proof procedure are all referred to by the name Quantifier Negation (QN)

Quantifier Negation, continued Adding (x) to an expression does the same job as adding ˜( ∃ x) ˜ to that expression, and, similarly, adding ˜( ∃ x) ˜ to an expression does the same as adding (x) to it. The first version of rule QN allows us to make inferences from of these sorts of expressions to the other.

Quantifier Negation, continued The other three varieties of Rule QN are similar to the first one. The first tells us that we can move from “Everything has weight,” to “There isn’t anything that does not have weight,” the second from “Something has weight” to “It’s not the case that nothing has weight,” the third from “Everything is such that it doesn’t have weight” to “It’s not the case that something has weight,” and the fourth from “There is something that doesn’t have any weight” to “It’s not the case that everything has weight”.

Quantifier Negation, continued The four quantifier negation rules require us to do exactly the same thing: Change the quantifier in question from an existential to a universal quantifier, or vice versa Remove any negation signs there may have been either to the left or to the right of that quantifier Put negation signs in whichever of these two places there may not have originally been one.

Key Term Quasivariable