Using Predicate and

Propositional Logic
Unit 2

2
Using Propositional Logic
Representing simple facts
It is raining
RAINING
It is sunny
SUNNY
It is windy
WINDY
If it is raining, then it is not sunny
RAINING SUNNY
3
Using Propositional Logic
Theorem proving is decidable

Cannot represent objects and quantification
Compound Proposition or Complex sentences are
formed from atomic formulas using the logical
connectives. There are five connectives in common are:
(&) : for AND or conjunction
: for OR or disjunction
(~) : for NOT or negation
( ) : for if_then or implication
( ) : for if and only if or biconditional or
equivalence
4
Every propositional symbol is a Well
formed formulas(WFF)

If P and Q are WFF then
(P Q)
(P Q)
(P Q) and
(P Q) are also WFFs.
Negation of a WFF is a WFF

5
Truth Table for WFF

P Q P PQ PQ P Q P Q
T T F T T T T
T F F F T F F
F T T F T T F
F F T F F T T
6
Example : Prove that implication is transitive in the propositional
calculus using truth table
i.e. (((P Q)(Q R)) (P R))
Solution :
_______________________________________________
P Q R A:P Q B:Q R C:AB D:P R C D
T T T T T T T T
T T F T F F F T
T F T F T F T T
T F F F T F F T
F T T T T T T T
F T F T F F T T
F F T T T T T T
F F F T T T T T
7
8
Using Predicate Logic
Can represent objects and quantification

Theorem proving is semi-decidable

9
Using Predicate Logic
1. Marcus was a man.
2. Marcus was a Pompeian.
3. All Pompeians were Romans.
4. Caesar was a ruler.
5. All Pompeians were either loyal to Caesar or hated him.
6. Every one is loyal to someone.
7. People only try to assassinate rulers they are not loyal to.
8. Marcus tried to assassinate Caesar.

10
Using Predicate Logic
1. Marcus was a man.
man(Marcus)

11
Using Predicate Logic
2. Marcus was a Pompeian.
Pompeian(Marcus)

12
Using Predicate Logic
3. All Pompeians were Romans.
x: Pompeian(x) Roman(x)
13
Using Predicate Logic
4. Caesar was a ruler.
ruler(Caesar)


14
Using Predicate Logic
5. All Pompeians were either loyal to Caesar or hated him.
inclusive-or
x: Roman(x) loyalto(x, Caesar) v hate(x, Caesar)

exclusive-or
x: Roman(x) (loyalto(x, Caesar) . hate(x, Caesar)) v
(loyalto(x, Caesar) . hate(x, Caesar))

15
Using Predicate Logic
6. Every one is loyal to someone.
x: -y: loyalto(x, y) -y: x: loyalto(x, y)

16
Using Predicate Logic
7. People only try to assassinate rulers they are not loyal to.


x: y: person(x) . ruler(y) . tryassassinate(x, y)
loyalto(x, y)

17
Using Predicate Logic
8. Marcus tried to assassinate Caesar.
tryassassinate(Marcus, Caesar)
18
Using Predicate Logic
Was Marcus loyal to Caesar?
man(Marcus)
ruler(Caesar)
tryassassinate(Marcus, Caesar)
x: man(x) person(x)
loyalto(Marcus, Caesar)

19
Using Predicate Logic
Many English sentences are ambiguous.
There is often a choice of how to represent
knowledge.
Obvious information may be necessary for reasoning
We may not know in advance which statements to
deduce (P or P).

Properties of Well Formed Formulas(WFFs)
Valid or Tautologies : True for every interpretation
Satisfiable or Consistent : Some Interpretation True
Contradiction or Inconsistent or Unsatisfiable : No
Interpretation True
Equivalence : Two sentences are equivalent if they
have the same truth value under every interpretation
Logical Consequences or Logically Follow : A
sentence is a logical consequence of another if it is
satisfied by all interpretations which satisfy the first.
20
21
Reasoning
1. Marcus was a Pompeian.
2. All Pompeians died when the volcano erupted in 79 A.D.
3. It is now 2008 A.D.

Is Marcus alive?
22
Reasoning
1. Marcus was a Pompeian.
Pompeian(Marcus)
2. All Pompeians died when the volcano erupted in 79 A.D.
erupted(volcano, 79) . x: Pompeian(x) died(x, 79)
3. It is now 2008 A.D.
now = 2008

23
Reasoning
1. Marcus was a Pompeian.
Pompeian(Marcus)
2. All Pompeians died when the volcano erupted in 79 A.D.
erupted(volcano, 79) . x: Pompeian(x) died(x, 79)
3. It is now 2008 A.D.
now = 2008

x: t
1
: t
2
: died(x, t
1
) . greater-than(t
2
, t
1
) dead(x, t
2
)


24
Resolution
Robinson, J.A. 1965. A machine-oriented logic based on
the resolution principle.
25
Resolution
The basic ideas
KB |= o KB . o |= false
26
Resolution
The basic ideas
KB |= o KB . o |= false
(o v |) . ( v |) (o v )
27
Resolution
The basic ideas
KB |= o KB . o |= false
(o v |) . ( v |) (o v )
sound and complete
28
Resolution in Propositional Logic
1. Convert all the propositions of KB to clause form (S).
2. Negate o and convert it to clause form. Add it to S.
3. Repeat until either a contradiction is found or no progress can
be made.
a. Select two clauses (o v P) and ( v P).
b. Add the resolvent (o v ) to S.


29
Resolution in Propositional Logic
Example:
KB = {P, (P . Q) R, (S v T) Q, T}
o = R

30
Resolution in Predicate Logic
Example:
KB = {P(a), x: (P(x) . Q(x)) R(x), y: (S(y) v T(y)) Q(y), T(a)}
o = R(a)

31
Resolution in Predicate Logic
Unification:
UNIFY(p, q) = unifier u where SUBST(u, p) = SUBST(u, q)


32
Resolution in Predicate Logic
Unification:
x: knows(John, x) hates(John, x)
knows(John, Jane)
y: knows(y, Leonid)
y: knows(y, mother(y))
x: knows(x, Elizabeth)

UNIFY(knows(John, x), knows(John, Jane)) = {Jane/x}
UNIFY(knows(John, x), knows(y, Leonid)) = {Leonid/x, John/y}
UNIFY(knows(John, x), knows(y, mother(y))) = {John/y, mother(John)/x}
UNIFY(knows(John, x), knows(x, Elizabeth)) = FAIL

33
Resolution in Predicate Logic
Unification: Standardization
UNIFY(knows(John, x), knows(y, Elizabeth)) = {John/y, Elizabeth/x}


34
Resolution in Predicate Logic
Unification: Most general unifier
UNIFY(knows(John, x), knows(y, z)) = {John/y, John/x, John/z}
= {John/y, Jane/x, Jane/z}
= {John/y, v/x, v/z}
= {John/y, z/x, Jane/v}
= {John/y, z/x}

35
Resolution in Predicate Logic
Unification: Occur check
UNIFY(knows(x, x), knows(y, mother(y))) = FAIL

36
Conversion to Clause Form
1. Eliminate .
P Q P v Q
2. Reduce the scope of each to a single term.
(P v Q) P . Q
(P . Q) P v Q
x: P -x: P
-x: p x: P
P P
3. Standardize variables so that each quantifier binds a unique
variable.
(x: P(x)) v (-x: Q(x)) (x: P(x)) v (-y: Q(y))

37
Conversion to Clause Form
4. Move all quantifiers to the left without changing their relative
order.
(x: P(x)) v (-y: Q(y)) x: -y: (P(x) v (Q(y))
5. Eliminate - (Skolemization).
-x: P(x) P(c) Skolem constant
x: -y P(x, y) x: P(x, f(x)) Skolem function
6. Drop .
x: P(x) P(x)
7. Convert the formula into a conjunction of disjuncts.
(P . Q) v R (P v R) . (Q v R)
8. Create a separate clause corresponding to each conjunct.
9. Standardize apart the variables in the set of obtained clauses.
38
Conversion to Clause Form
1. Eliminate .
2. Reduce the scope of each to a single term.
3. Standardize variables so that each quantifier binds a unique
variable.
4. Move all quantifiers to the left without changing their relative
order.
5. Eliminate - (Skolemization).
6. Drop .
7. Convert the formula into a conjunction of disjuncts.
8. Create a separate clause corresponding to each conjunct.
9. Standardize apart the variables in the set of obtained clauses.
39
Example
1. Marcus was a man.
2. Marcus was a Pompeian.
3. All Pompeians were Romans.
4. Caesar was a ruler.
5. All Pompeians were either loyal to Caesar or hated him.
6. Every one is loyal to someone.
7. People only try to assassinate rulers they are not loyal to.
8. Marcus tried to assassinate Caesar.

40
Example
1. Man(Marcus).
2. Pompeian(Marcus).
3. x: Pompeian(x) Roman(x).
4. ruler(Caesar).
5. x: Roman(x) loyalto(x, Caesar) v hate(x, Caesar).
6. x: -y: loyalto(x, y).
7. x: y: person(x) . ruler(y) . tryassassinate(x, y)
loyalto(x, y).
8. tryassassinate(Marcus, Caesar).

41
Example
Prove:
hate(Marcus, Caesar)

42
Question Answering
1. When did Marcus die?
2. Whom did Marcus hate?
3. Who tried to assassinate a ruler?
4. What happen in 79 A.D.?.
5. Did Marcus hate everyone?



43
Question Answering
PROLOG:
Only Horn sentences are acceptable



44
Question Answering
PROLOG:
Only Horn sentences are acceptable
The occur-check is omitted from the unification: unsound
test P(x, x)
P(x, f(x))



45
Question Answering
PROLOG:
Only Horn sentences are acceptable
The occur-check is omitted from the unification: unsound
test P(x, x)
P(x, f(x))
Backward chaining with depth-first search: incomplete
P(x, y) Q(x, y)
P(x, x)
Q(x, y) Q(y, x)



46
Question Answering
PROLOG:
Unsafe cut: incomplete
A B, C A
B D, !, E
D B, C

D, !, E, C

!, E, C

47
Question Answering
PROLOG:
Unsafe cut: incomplete
A B, C A
B D, !, E
D B, C

D, !, E, C

!, E, C
Negation as failure: P if fails to prove P
48
Homework
Exercises 1-13, Chapter 5, Rich&Knight AI Text Book