using first order logic ch 9 unification
play

Using first order logic (Ch. 9) Unification First sentence is the - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Sep 10, 2022 •1.01k likes •1.49k views

Using first order logic (Ch. 9) Unification First sentence is the only one with variables, there are 9 options (only 6 if x y) One unification is {x/Sue, y/Devin} We cannot say {x/Devin, y/Alex}, as this is creates a contradiction General

  1. Using first order logic (Ch. 9)

  2. Unification First sentence is the only one with variables, there are 9 options (only 6 if x ≠ y) One unification is {x/Sue, y/Devin} We cannot say {x/Devin, y/Alex}, as this is creates a contradiction

  3. General modus ponens Objects = {Cat, Dog, Frog, Rat, Sally, Jane} Is Sally happy? How about Party(Sally, Frog)?

  4. General modus ponens We can substitute {x/Sally} here with MP: To get: Then sub. {x/Sally, y/Frog} with MP here: To get: However, we cannot tell if Sally is happy, as we cannot unify:

  5. Review: unification & MP Today we will focus on using modus ponens with unification to infer whether a statement is true or not To use general modus ponens, we need to find a substitution for the variables that is valid Finding this substitution is more or less a brute force method (try to substitute the most restricted variables first)

  6. General modus ponens You try! Can you get Grilled(Bread)? How about Grilled(Chicken)?

  7. General modus ponens You try! Can you get Grilled(Bread)? Yes How about Grilled(Chicken)? No

  8. Forward chaining You probably just reasoned out the way to think through this, but we will talk about two algorithms to do this in a procedural manner The first we will look at is forward chaining, where you build up new sentences using modus ponens until you generate your goal Then we will talk about improvements over this basic implementation

  9. Forward chaining Consider the following KB...

  10. Forward chaining Grilled(Bread) Sandwich(Bread) Grilled(M1) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

  11. Forward chaining Algorithm: 1. repeat until new empty 2. new ←{} 3. for each sentence in KB 4. for each substantiation for a modus ponens 5. q ← substitute RHS of modus ponens 6. if q does not unify/match sentence in KB 7. new ←new U q 8. if q satisfies query, return q 9. add new to KB 10. return false

  12. Forward chaining Build the whole forward chaining KB for:

  13. Forward chaining F(B1) C(B1) ^ D(B1) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

  14. Forward chaining This basic approach is redundant and can be improved in three major ways: 1. Improve the efficiency of unification -Allows for faster modus ponens 2. Incremental forward chaining -Reduces redundant computations 3. Eliminate irrelevant facts -Prunes KB

  15. Unification efficiency It is efficient to unify/substitute for the variable with the least possibilities on the left hand side (LHS) of modus ponens This is basically the same arguments are the “minimum remaining value” for CSPs The look-up of values for a single variable is constant time, but then we need to compare against all other in sentence (NP-hard problem)

  16. Unification efficiency In the example, we only have B(B1) true for some variable B1, which is probably smaller than all possible A(x) So here it would make sense to substitute B1 first into the first sentence, then try to find a matching A value (which is easy as A(x) is valid for any x)

  17. Incremental chaining All novel sentences build off the “new” set (except for building the first level) The computer re-searches all the old sentences every time and regenerates the same sentences By requiring the “new” set to be involved, we can greatly cut down computation of the depth of chain tree is fairly deep

  18. Incremental chaining In the example, the first loop of chaining finds: When starting the second loop, all possible combinations of the original KB will be searched again, and generate the above again Instead, we can limit our search to just combined with any of the original KB sentences

  19. Eliminate irrelevancy There are two primary ways reduce search: 1. Start from the goal and work backwards 2. Restrict KB to help guide search The first way works backwards keeping track of any possible useful sentences Any sentences not found on the reverse search (BFS, DFS or anything) can be dropped

  20. Eliminate irrelevancy For example, in our KB: If we wanted to check: KB entails “E(Sally)” Sentence 2. gets the goal and needs C Sentence 1. gives C (and D) and needs A & B Sentence 5. and 6. give A&B... can drop 3&4

  21. Eliminate irrelevancy You can add more restrictions to existing sentences to focus the search early on This combined with the unification efficiency can greatly speed up search For example, if we asked entailment: , we could modify the first sentence: and add Elim(Cat) to cause conflict early

  22. Forward chaining Forward chaining is sound (will not create invalid sentences) If all the sentences in the KB are definite then it is complete (can find all entailed sentences) Definite means that there can only be one positive literal in CNF form

  23. Backward chaining Backward chaining is almost the opposite of forward chaining (like eliminating irrelevancy) You try all sentences that are of the form: , and try to find a way to satisfy P1, P2, ... recursively This is similar to a depth first search AND/OR trees (OR are possible substitutions while AND nodes are the sentence conjunctions)

  24. Backward chaining Let's go back to this and backward chain Grilled(Bread)

  25. Backward chaining Grilled(Bread) 3. 2. Sandwich(Bread) OnGrill(x,Bread) 5. 1. Meat(x) Make(Bread,x,Bread) 4. 6.

  26. Backward chaining Grilled(Bread) 3. 2. Sandwich(Bread) OnGrill(x,Bread) 5. 1. Meat(x) Make(Bread,x,Bread) 4. 6. These variables have no correlation, so relabel one to be different

  27. Backward chaining Grilled(Bread) 3. 2. Sandwich(Bread) OnGrill(x,Bread) 5. 1. Meat(z) Make(Bread,z,Bread) 4. 6. Begin DFS (left branch first)

  28. Backward chaining Grilled(Bread) 3. 2. Sandwich(Bread) OnGrill(x,Bread) 5. 1. Meat(z) Make(Bread,z,Bread) 4. 6. Begin DFS (left branch first)

  29. Backward chaining Grilled(Bread) 3. 2. Sandwich(Bread) OnGrill(x,Bread) 5. 1. Meat(z) Make(Bread,z,Bread) 4. 6. Begin DFS (left branch first)

  30. Backward chaining Grilled(Bread) 3. 2. Sandwich(Bread) OnGrill(x,Bread) 5. 1. Meat(z) Make(Bread,z,Bread) 4. 6. Begin DFS (left branch first)

  31. Backward chaining Grilled(Bread) 3. 2. Sandwich(Bread) OnGrill(x,Bread) 5. 1. Meat(z) Make(Bread,z,Bread) 4. 6. {z/M1} Begin DFS (left branch first)

  32. Backward chaining Grilled(Bread) 3. 2. Sandwich(Bread) OnGrill(x,Bread) 5. 1. Meat(M1) Make(Bread,M1,Bread) 4. 6. {z/M1} applies to all sentences Begin DFS (left branch first)

  33. Backward chaining Grilled(Bread) 3. 2. Sandwich(Bread) OnGrill(x,Bread) 5. 1. Meat(M1) Make(Bread,M1,Bread) 4. 6. {z/M1} Begin DFS (left branch first)

  34. Backward chaining Grilled(Bread) 3. 2. Sandwich(Bread) OnGrill(x,Bread) 5. 1. Meat(M1) Make(Bread,M1,Bread) 4. 6. {z/M1} Begin DFS (left branch first)

  35. Backward chaining Grilled(Bread) 3. 2. Sandwich(Bread) OnGrill(x,Bread) 5. 1. Meat(M1) Make(Bread,M1,Bread) 4. 6. {z/M1} {} Begin DFS (left branch first)

  36. Backward chaining Grilled(Bread) 3. 2. Sandwich(Bread) OnGrill(x,Bread) 5. 1. Meat(M1) Make(Bread,M1,Bread) 4. 6. {z/M1} {} Begin DFS (left branch first)

  37. Backward chaining Grilled(Bread) 3. 2. Sandwich(Bread) OnGrill(x,Bread) 5. 1. Meat(M1) Make(Bread,M1,Bread) 4. 6. {z/M1} {} Begin DFS (left branch first)

  38. Backward chaining Grilled(Bread) 3. 2. Sandwich(Bread) OnGrill(x,Bread) 5. 1. {x/any x} Meat(M1) Make(Bread,M1,Bread) 4. 6. {z/M1} {} Begin DFS (left branch first)

  39. Backward chaining The algorithm to compute this needs to mix between going deeper into the tree (ANDs) and unifying/substituting (ORs) For this reason, the search is actually two different mini-algorithms that intermingle: 1. FOL-BC-OR (unify) 2. FOL-BC-AND (depth)

  40. Backward chaining FOL-BC-OR(KB, goal, sub) 1. for each rule (lhs => rhs) with rhs == goal 2. standardize-variables(lhs, rhs) 3. for each newSub in FOL-BC-AND(KB, lhs, unify(rhs, goal sub)) 4. yield newSub FOL-BC-AND(KB, goals sub) 1. if sub = failure, return 2. else if length(goals) == 0 then yield sub 3. else 4. first,rest ←First(goals), Rest(goals) 5. for each newSub in FOL-BC-OR(KB, substitute(sub, first), sub) 6. for each newNewSub in FOL-BC-AND(KB, rest, newSub) 7. yield newNewSub

  41. Backward chaining Use backward chaining to infer: Grilled(Chicken)

  42. Backward chaining Grilled(Chicken) 3. 2. Meat(Chicken) OnGrill(x,Chicken) OnGrill(x,Chicken) 4. 5. 5. {Chicken/M1} Sandwich(Chicken) Fail! Begin DFS (left branch first)

  43. Backward chaining Grilled(Chicken) 3. 2. Meat(Chicken) OnGrill(x,Chicken) OnGrill(x,Chicken) 4. 5. 5. {Chicken/M1} Sandwich(Chicken) Fail! No such sentence Fail! Begin DFS (left branch first)

  44. Backward chaining Similar to normal DFS, this backward chaining can get stuck in infinite loops (in the case of functions) However, in general it can be much faster as it can be fairly easily parallelized (the different branches of the tree)

Recommend

Using first order logic (Ch. 9) Announcements Writing 4 posted HW 3 graded Unification First

Using first order logic (Ch. 9) Announcements Writing 4 posted HW 3 graded Unification First

Using first order logic (Ch. 9) Announcements Writing 4 posted HW 3 graded Unification First sentence is the only one with variables, there are 9 options (only 6 if x y) One unification is {x/Sue, y/Devin} We cannot say {x/Devin,

738 views • 45 slides
Inference in First-Order Logic C H A P T E R 9 H A S S A N K H O S R A V I S P R I N G 2 0 1 1

Inference in First-Order Logic C H A P T E R 9 H A S S A N K H O S R A V I S P R I N G 2 0 1 1

Inference in First-Order Logic C H A P T E R 9 H A S S A N K H O S R A V I S P R I N G 2 0 1 1 Outline Reducing first-order inference to propositional inference Unification Generalized Modus Ponens Forward chaining Backward

856 views • 58 slides
Inference in first-order logic Chapter 9 1 Outline Reducing first-order inference to

Inference in first-order logic Chapter 9 1 Outline Reducing first-order inference to

Inference in first-order logic Chapter 9 1 Outline Reducing first-order inference to propositional inference Unification Generalized Modus Ponens Forward and backward chaining Logic programming Resolution 2 Reasoning in

987 views • 40 slides
Unification in the Description Logic EL EL - unification Minimal unifiers Franz Baader and

Unification in the Description Logic EL EL - unification Minimal unifiers Franz Baader and

Unification in EL Baader & Morawska Introduction Unification in the Description Logic EL EL - unification Minimal unifiers Franz Baader and Barbara Morawska Decision Procedure Conclusion TU Dresden, Germany UNIF 2009 Unification in

359 views • 25 slides
Inference in first-order logic Chapter 9 Chapter 9 1 Outline Reducing first-order inference

Inference in first-order logic Chapter 9 Chapter 9 1 Outline Reducing first-order inference

Inference in first-order logic Chapter 9 Chapter 9 1 Outline Reducing first-order inference to propositional inference Unification Generalized Modus Ponens Forward and backward chaining Logic programming Resolution

793 views • 48 slides
Inference in first-order logic Chapter 9 Chapter 9 1 Outline Reducing first-order inference

Inference in first-order logic Chapter 9 Chapter 9 1 Outline Reducing first-order inference

Inference in first-order logic Chapter 9 Chapter 9 1 Outline Reducing first-order inference to propositional inference Unification Generalized Modus Ponens Forward and backward chaining Logic programming Resolution

1.2k views • 46 slides
Inference in first-order logic Chapter 9 Chapter 9 1 Outline Reducing first-order inference

Inference in first-order logic Chapter 9 Chapter 9 1 Outline Reducing first-order inference

Inference in first-order logic Chapter 9 Chapter 9 1 Outline Reducing first-order inference to propositional inference Unification Generalized Modus Ponens Forward and backward chaining Resolution Chapter 9 2 Universal

789 views • 42 slides
Projective unification in modal logic II Projective unification in modal logic II Piotr Wojtylak

Projective unification in modal logic II Projective unification in modal logic II Piotr Wojtylak

Projective unification in modal logic II Projective unification in modal logic II Piotr Wojtylak Institute of Mathematics, Silesian University, Katowice, Poland Projective unification in modal logic II Piotr Wojtylak Institute of Mathematics,

827 views • 82 slides
Weak Cardinality Theorems for First-Order Logic Till Tantau Fakult at f ur Elektrotechnik

Weak Cardinality Theorems for First-Order Logic Till Tantau Fakult at f ur Elektrotechnik

Weak Cardinality Theorems for First-Order Logic Till Tantau Fakult at f ur Elektrotechnik und Informatik Technische Universit at Berlin Fundamentals of Computation Theory 2003 logo History Unification by Logic Applications Summary

789 views • 45 slides
E -Unification of Higher-order Patterns Alexandre Boudet Evelyne Contejean LRI Orsay France

E -Unification of Higher-order Patterns Alexandre Boudet Evelyne Contejean LRI Orsay France

E -Unification of Higher-order Patterns Alexandre Boudet Evelyne Contejean LRI Orsay France Motivations Higher-order unification is undecidable (Huet) Unification of higher-order patterns is decidable (Miller) Combination of

496 views • 23 slides
Introduction to Unification Theory Higher-Order Unification Temur Kutsia RISC, Johannes Kepler

Introduction to Unification Theory Higher-Order Unification Temur Kutsia RISC, Johannes Kepler

Introduction to Unification Theory Higher-Order Unification Temur Kutsia RISC, Johannes Kepler University of Linz, Austria kutsia@risc.jku.at Overview Introduction Preliminaries Higher-Order Unification Procedure Outline Introduction

1.53k views • 130 slides
Logic as a Tool Chapter 3: Understanding First-order Logic 3.2 Semantics of first-order logic

Logic as a Tool Chapter 3: Understanding First-order Logic 3.2 Semantics of first-order logic

Logic as a Tool Chapter 3: Understanding First-order Logic 3.2 Semantics of first-order logic Valentin Goranko Stockholm University October 2016 Goranko Translation from first-order logic to natural language: examples in the structure of real

994 views • 20 slides
The unification type of Workshop on Admissible Rules and Unification

The unification type of Workshop on Admissible Rules and Unification

The unication type The unification type of Workshop on Admissible Rules and Unification http://logica.dmi.unisa.it/lucaspada University of Salerno Department of Mathematics Luca Spada Based on a joint work with V. Marra ukasiewicz logic

1.83k views • 145 slides
First-order logic Whereas propositional logic assumes world contains facts , first-order logic

First-order logic Whereas propositional logic assumes world contains facts , first-order logic

First-order logic Whereas propositional logic assumes world contains facts , first-order logic (like natural language) assumes the world contains First-order logic Objects: people, houses, numbers, theories, Ronald McDonald, colors, baseball

245 views • 6 slides
CSC421 Intro to Artificial Intelligence UNIT 14: Inference in First-Order Logic Outline

CSC421 Intro to Artificial Intelligence UNIT 14: Inference in First-Order Logic Outline

CSC421 Intro to Artificial Intelligence UNIT 14: Inference in First-Order Logic Outline Generalized Modus Ponens Forward and backward chaining Resolution Logic Programming Unification We can get the inference immediately if

218 views • 21 slides
Using first order logic (Ch. 8-9) Review: First order logic In first order logic, we have objects

Using first order logic (Ch. 8-9) Review: First order logic In first order logic, we have objects

Using first order logic (Ch. 8-9) Review: First order logic In first order logic, we have objects and relations between objects The relations are basically a list of all valid tuples that satisfy the relation We can also have variables that

451 views • 26 slides
Using first order logic (Ch. 8-9) Review: First order logic In first order logic, we have objects

Using first order logic (Ch. 8-9) Review: First order logic In first order logic, we have objects

Using first order logic (Ch. 8-9) Review: First order logic In first order logic, we have objects and relations between objects The relations are basically a list of all valid tuples that satisfy the relation We can also have variables that

382 views • 24 slides
I nference in First-Order Logic I f i Fi t O d L i 1 Outline Reducing first-order

I nference in First-Order Logic I f i Fi t O d L i 1 Outline Reducing first-order

I nference in First-Order Logic I f i Fi t O d L i 1 Outline Reducing first-order inference to propositional inference Unification Generalized Modus Ponens Generalized Modus Ponens Forward chaining

655 views • 39 slides
Logic as a Tool Chapter 3: Understanding First-order Logic 3.1 First-order structures and

Logic as a Tool Chapter 3: Understanding First-order Logic 3.1 First-order structures and

Logic as a Tool Chapter 3: Understanding First-order Logic 3.1 First-order structures and languages. Terms and formulae of first-order logic. Valentin Goranko Stockholm University October 2016 Goranko Propositional logic is too weak

188 views • 14 slides
Order-Sorted Unification with Regular Expression Sorts (Work in Progress) Temur Kutsia 1 Mircea

Order-Sorted Unification with Regular Expression Sorts (Work in Progress) Temur Kutsia 1 Mircea

Order-Sorted Unification with Regular Expression Sorts (Work in Progress) Temur Kutsia 1 Mircea Marin 2 1 RISC, JKU Linz, Austria. 2 University of Tsukuba, Japan Presented by Laura Kov acs Motivation Advantages of using sorts in logic:

620 views • 46 slides
Introduction Unification problem in a logical system L Given a formula ( x 1 , . . . , x n )

Introduction Unification problem in a logical system L Given a formula ( x 1 , . . . , x n )

Unification in modal logic Alt 1 Philippe Balbiani 1 and Tinko Tinchev 2 1 Institut de recherche en informatique de Toulouse CNRS Universit e de Toulouse 2 Department of Mathematical Logic and Applications Sofia University Introduction

491 views • 35 slides
Hybrid Unification in the Description Logic EL Franz Baader, Oliver Fern andez Gil and Barbara

Hybrid Unification in the Description Logic EL Franz Baader, Oliver Fern andez Gil and Barbara

Hybrid Unification in the Description Logic EL Franz Baader, Oliver Fern andez Gil and Barbara Morawska 9th International Symposium, FroCoS Nancy, September 20th, 2013 1/23 Outline 1 The Description Logic EL . 2 Unification in EL . 3 Hybrid

819 views • 60 slides
Logic as a Tool Chapter 3: Understanding First-order Logic 3.1 First-order structures and

Logic as a Tool Chapter 3: Understanding First-order Logic 3.1 First-order structures and

Logic as a Tool Chapter 3: Understanding First-order Logic 3.1 First-order structures and languages. Terms and formulae of first-order logic. Valentin Goranko Stockholm University October 2016 Goranko Propositional logic is too weak Goranko

1.69k views • 109 slides
Why higher-order logic? Higher-Order logic Expressive Mathematics Verification

Why higher-order logic? Higher-Order logic Expressive Mathematics Verification

Extending SMT solvers to higher-order logic Haniel Barbosa Andrew Reynolds Daniel El Ouraoui Clark Barrett Cesare Tinelli SMT 2019 20190707, Lisbon, PT To be published in the proceedings of CADE 2019 Why higher-order logic?

569 views • 25 slides

More recommend