First Order Predicate Logic. Lecture 4

Save this PDF as:

Size: px
Start display at page:

Transcription

1 First Order Predicate Logic Lecture 4

2 First Order Predicate Logic Limitation of Propositional Logic The facts: peter is a man, paul is a man, john is a man can be symbolized by P, Q and R respectively in propositional logic, Can t draw any conclusions about similarities between P, Q and R. Better to represent these facts as MAN(peter), MAN(paul) and MAN(john).

3 Cont Even more difficult to represent sentences like All men are mortal in propositional logic. Such sentences really need quantification. In Predicate Logic, these limitations are removed to great extent. Predicate Logic is logical extension of propositional logic. First Order Predicate Logic is one where the quantification is over simple variables.

4 Predicate Calculus It has three more logical notions as compared to propositional calculus. Terms Predicates Quantifiers (universal or existential quantifiers i.e. for all' and there exists ) Term is a constant (single individual or concept i.e.,5,john etc.),a variable that stands for different individuals, a function: a mapping that maps n terms to a term i.e., if f is n- place function symbol and t 1,, t n are terms, then f(t 1,, t n ) is a term.

5 Cont Predicate : a relation that maps n terms to a truth value true (T) or false (F). LOVE (john, mary) LOVE(father(john), john) LOVE is a predicate. father is a function. Quantifiers: Variables are used in conjunction with quantifiers. There are two types of quantifiers viz.., there exist ( ) and for all ( ). every man is mortal can be represented as ( x) (MAN(x) MORTAL(x)).

6 Examples A statement x is greater than y is represented in predicate calculus as GREATER(x, y). It is defined as follows: GREATER( x, y) = T, if x > y = F, otherwise The predicate names GREATER takes two terms and map to T or F depending upon the values of their terms

7 Examples Cont A statement john loves everyone is represented as ( x) LOVE(john, x) which maps it to true when x gets instantiated to actual values. A statement Every father loves his child is represented as ( x) LOVE(father(x), x). Here father is a function that maps x to his father. The predicate name LOVE takes two terms and map to T or F depending upon the values of their terms.

8 First Order Predicate Calculus The first order predicate calculus (FOPC) is a formal language. Basic rules for formula in Predicate Calculus are same as those of Propositional Calculus. A wide variety of statements are expressed in contrast to Propositional Calculus

9 Well-formed Formula Well-formed formula in FOPC is defined recursively as follows: Atomic formula P(t 1,, t n ) is a well-formed formula, where P is a predicate symbol and t 1,...,t n are the terms. It is also called atom. If α and β are well-formed formulae, then ~ (α), (α V β ), (α Λ β), (α β) and (α β ) are well-formed formulae. If α is a well-formed formula and x is a free variable in α, then ( x)α and ( x)α are well-formed formulae. Well-formed formulae are generated by a finite number of applications of above rules.

10 Example Example: Translate the text "Every man is mortal. John is a man. Therefore, John is mortal" into a FOPC formula. Solution:Let MAN(x), MORTAL(x) represent that x is a man and x is mortal respectively. Every man is mortal : ( x) (MAN(x) MORTAL(x)) John is a man : MAN(john) John is mortal : MORTAL(john) The whole text can be represented by the following formula. ( x) ((MAN(x) MORTAL(x)) Λ MAN(john)) MORTAL(john)

11 First Order Predicate Logic First order predicate calculus becomes First Order Predicate Logic if inference rules are added to it. Using inference rules one can derive new formula using the existing ones. Interpretations of Formulae in Predicate Logic In propositional logic, an interpretation is simply an assignment of truth values to the atoms. In Predicate Logic, there are variables, so we have to do more than that.

12 Interpretation An interpretation of a formula α in FOL consists of a non empty domain D and an assignment of values to each constant, function symbol and predicate symbol occurring in α. It is denoted by I and is defined as follows: Assign a value to each constant from the domain D. Each n-place function f (mapping from D n to D) is assigned a value from D such as f(x 1,, x n ) = x, where (x 1,, x n ) D n and x D. Assign a value from a set {T, F} to each n-place predicate P (mapping from D n to {T, F}). Here T represents true value and F represents false value.

13 Interpretation Cont The quantifiers ( x) and ( x) are interpreted as follows: ( x) will be interpreted as for all elements x such that x D ( x) as there exist x such that x D. We use notation I[α] to represents that α is evaluated under interpretation I over a domain D. I[α] under interpretation I over a domain D cab be evaluated to be true or false.

14 Interpretation Cont Let α and β are formulae and I is an interpretation over any domain D. The following holds true. I[α Λ β] = I[α] Λ I[β] I[α V β] = I[α] V I[β] I[α β] = I[α] I[β] I[~α] = ~ I[α] For any interpretation I and a formula using ( x) & ( x), the following results holds true. I[( x)p(x)] = T iff I[P(x)] = T, x D = F, otherwise I[( x) P(x)] = T iff c D such that I[P(c)] = T = F, otherwise

15 Example - Interpretation Let α : ( x) ( y) P(x, y) be a formula. Evaluate α under the following interpretation I. I D = {1, 2}; I[P(1, 1)] = F; I[P(1, 2)] = T; I[P(2, 1)] = T; I[P(2, 2)] = F

16 Example - Cont Solution: Consider the following cases: If x = 1, then 2 D such that I[P(1, 2)] = T If x = 2, then 1 D such that I[P(2, 1)] = T Therefore, I[α] = I[( x) ( y) P(x, y)] = T i.e., α is true under above interpretation.

17 Exercise Consider a formula α : ( x) (P(x) Q( f(x),c)) and the following interpretation D = {1, 2}; c = 1; f (1) = 2, f (2) = 1 I[P(1)] = F, I[P(2)] = T I[Q(1, 1)] = T, I[Q(1, 2)] = T, I[Q(2, 1)] = F, I[Q(2, 2)] = T I Find the truth value of α: ( x) ( P(x) Q( f(x), c) ) under I - (Ans: true)

18 Definitions A formula α is said to be consistent (satisfiable) if and only if there exists an interpretation I such that I[α] = T. Alternatively, we say that I is a model of α or I satisfies α. A formula α is said to be inconsistent (unsatisfiable) if and only if no interpretation that satisfies α or there exists no model for α. A formula α is valid if and only if for every interpretation I, I[α] = T. A formula α is a logical consequence of a set of formulae {α1, α2,..., αn } if and only if for every interpretation I, if I[α 1 Λ Λ α n ] = T, then I[α] = T.

19 Inference Rules in Predicate Logic Modus Ponen Rule: Lemma 1: If α : ( x) ( P(x) Q(x) ) and β : P(c) are two formulae, then Q(c) is a logical consequence of α and β, where c is a constant. Modus Tollen Rule: Lemma 2: If α : ( x) ( P(x) Q(x) ) and β : ~ Q(c) are two formulae, then ~ P(c) is a logical consequence of α and β, where c is a constant.

20 Example Show that δ is a logical consequence of α and β α : ( x) ( P(x) ~Q(x) ) β : ( x) ( Q(x) Λ R(x) ) δ : ( x) ( R(x) Λ ~ P(x) ) Solution: Let I be any interpretation over any domain D. Assume that I models α Λ β i.e., I[αΛβ] = T over D. i.e., I[( x) ( P(x) ~Q(x) )] = T (1) and I[( x) ( Q(x) Λ R(x) )] = T (2)

21 Cont From (2), there exist some constant c D such that I[(Q(c) Λ R(c) )] = T (3) i.e., I[Q(c) ] = T (4) and I[R(c) ] = T (5) From (4), I[~ Q(c)] = F (6) From (1), I[P(c) ~Q(c)] = T, where c is the same constant I[P(c)] I[~Q(c)] = T (7) From (6) and (7), we get I[P(c)] = F I[~ P(c)] = T (8)

22 Cont From (5) and (8), we get I[R(c)] Λ I[~ P(c)] = T i.e., I[R(c) Λ ~ P(c)] = T According to the definition of interpretation, we get I[( x)( R(x) Λ ~ P(x))] = T i.e., I[δ] = T Hence, δ is a logical consequence of α and β. This is a direct proof, often difficult.

23 Semantic Tableaux (Pred Logic) There are four more rules handling variables in a predicate formula in addition to one given for Propositional logic. Let us denote a formula containing a variable x by α[x]. Rule 10: ( x) α [x] α [t] for any ground term t, where t is a term free from variables.

24 Rules Cont Rule 11: ~ {( x) α [x] } ~ α [c] for any new constant c not occurring in α Rule 12: ( x) α [x] α [c] for any new constant c Rule 13: ~ {( x) α [x] } ~ α [t] for any ground term t

25 Few Definitions A path in a tableaux is contradictory or closed if some atomic formulae α and ~ α appear on the same path. If all the paths of a tableau are closed, then it is called a contradictory tableaux. A tableau proof of a formula α is a contradictory tableau with root as ~ α. Let α be any formula. If tableaux with α as a root is a contradictory tableaux, then α is said to be inconsistent otherwise α is said to be consistent. A formula α is said to be tableau provable (denoted by - α ) if a tableau constructed with ~ α as root is a contradictory tableau.

26 Example Show that the formula Solution: ( x) (P(x) Λ ~ ( Q(x) P(x)) ) is inconsistent. We have to show that tableau for [( x) (P(x) Λ ~ ( Q(x) P(x)))] as a root is a contradictory tableau. Then by definition we can infer that the formula is inconsistent.

27 Example Cont {Tableau root} ( x) (P(x) Λ ~ ( Q(x) P(x)) (1) {Apply R10 on 1} P(t) Λ ~ ( Q(t) P(t)) (2) where t is any ground term {Apply R1 on 2} {Apply R7 on 3} P(t) ~ ( Q(t) P(t)) (3) Q(t) ~ P(t) Closed {P(t), ~ P(t)}

28 Soundness and completeness Theorem: (Soundness and completeness) : A formula α is valid ( = α ) iff α is tableau provable ( - α ). Example: Show a validity of the following formula using tableaux method. ( x) P(x) ( x) P(x) Solution: If we show that ~ [( x) P(x) ( x) P(x)] has a contradictory tableau then α is tableau provable and hence by above theorem ( x) P(x) ( x) P(x) is valid.

29 More Definitions A set of formulae { α 1, α 2,.,α n } is said to be inconsistent if a tableau with root as ( α 1 Λ α 2.. Λ α n ) is a contradictory tableau. Λ Proof of a formula α from the set ={α 1, α 2,.., α n ) is a contradictory tableau with root as ( α 1 Λ α 2 Λ.. Λ α n Λ ~ α). Alternatively, we say that α is tableau provable from and denoted by - α. A formula α is a logical consequence of iff α is tableau provable from and is denoted by - α.

30 Exercises I. Translate the following English sentences into Predicate Logic Everyone is loyal to someone. All Romans were either loyal to Caesar or hated him. For every number, there is one and only one immediate successor. There is no number for which 0 is immediate successor. II. Evaluate truth values of the following formulae under the interpretation I (define your own interpretations). ( x) ( P(f (x) ) Λ Q(x, f (c) ) ) ( x) ( P(x) Λ Q(x, c) ) ( x) ( P(x) Q(x, c) ) ( x) ( y) ( P(x) Λ Q(x, y) ) ( x) ( y) ( P(x) Q( f (c), y) ) III. Transform the following formulae into PNF and then into Skolem Standard Form. ( x) ( y) (Q(x, y) P(x)) ( x )( ( y) P(x, y) ~ ( ( z) Q(z) Λ R(x)) ) ( x )( y) P(x, y) ( ( y) P(x, y) ( x )(( y) P(x, y) Λ (( z) Q(z) Λ R(x)) ) ( x )(P(x) Q(x)) ( ( x) P(x) ( x)q(x))

Predicate Logic. Example: All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. Socrates is mortal.

Predicate Logic Example: All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. Socrates is mortal. Note: We need logic laws that work for statements involving quantities like some and all. In English, the predicate is

Predicate Logic. For example, consider the following argument:

Predicate Logic The analysis of compound statements covers key aspects of human reasoning but does not capture many important, and common, instances of reasoning that are also logically valid. For example,

2. The Language of First-order Logic

2. The Language of First-order Logic KR & R Brachman & Levesque 2005 17 Declarative language Before building system before there can be learning, reasoning, planning, explanation... need to be able to

The Foundations: Logic and Proofs. Chapter 1, Part III: Proofs

The Foundations: Logic and Proofs Chapter 1, Part III: Proofs Rules of Inference Section 1.6 Section Summary Valid Arguments Inference Rules for Propositional Logic Using Rules of Inference to Build Arguments

Introduction to Predicate Logic. Ling324 Reading: Meaning and Grammar, pg

Introduction to Predicate Logic Ling324 Reading: Meaning and Grammar, pg. 113-141 Usefulness of Predicate Logic for Natural Language Semantics While in propositional logic, we can only talk about sentences

Propositional Logic. A proposition is a declarative sentence (a sentence that declares a fact) that is either true or false, but not both.

irst Order Logic Propositional Logic A proposition is a declarative sentence (a sentence that declares a fact) that is either true or false, but not both. Are the following sentences propositions? oronto

Lecture 8: Resolution theorem-proving

Comp24412 Symbolic AI Lecture 8: Resolution theorem-proving Ian Pratt-Hartmann Room KB2.38: email: ipratt@cs.man.ac.uk 2014 15 In the previous Lecture, we met SATCHMO, a first-order theorem-prover implemented

The Syntax of Predicate Logic

The Syntax of Predicate Logic LX 502 Semantics I October 11, 2008 1. Below the Sentence-Level In Propositional Logic, atomic propositions correspond to simple sentences in the object language. Since atomic

Predicate Calculus. There are certain arguments that seem to be perfectly logical, yet they cannot be expressed by using propositional calculus.

Predicate Calculus (Alternative names: predicate logic, first order logic, elementary logic, restricted predicate calculus, restricted functional calculus, relational calculus, theory of quantification,

Lecture 13 of 41. More Propositional and Predicate Logic

Lecture 13 of 41 More Propositional and Predicate Logic Monday, 20 September 2004 William H. Hsu, KSU http://www.kddresearch.org http://www.cis.ksu.edu/~bhsu Reading: Sections 8.1-8.3, Russell and Norvig

CHAPTER 3. Methods of Proofs. 1. Logical Arguments and Formal Proofs

CHAPTER 3 Methods of Proofs 1. Logical Arguments and Formal Proofs 1.1. Basic Terminology. An axiom is a statement that is given to be true. A rule of inference is a logical rule that is used to deduce

Fuzzy Implication Rules. Adnan Yazıcı Dept. of Computer Engineering, Middle East Technical University Ankara/Turkey

Fuzzy Implication Rules Adnan Yazıcı Dept. of Computer Engineering, Middle East Technical University Ankara/Turkey Fuzzy If-Then Rules Remember: The difference between the semantics of fuzzy mapping rules

Math 55: Discrete Mathematics

Math 55: Discrete Mathematics UC Berkeley, Fall 2011 Homework # 1, due Wedneday, January 25 1.1.10 Let p and q be the propositions The election is decided and The votes have been counted, respectively.

Problems on Discrete Mathematics 1

Problems on Discrete Mathematics 1 Chung-Chih Li 2 Kishan Mehrotra 3 Syracuse University, New York L A TEX at January 11, 2007 (Part I) 1 No part of this book can be reproduced without permission from

MATH 110 Spring 2015 Homework 6 Solutions

MATH 110 Spring 2015 Homework 6 Solutions Section 2.6 2.6.4 Let α denote the standard basis for V = R 3. Let α = {e 1, e 2, e 3 } denote the dual basis of α for V. We would first like to show that β =

ON FUNCTIONAL SYMBOL-FREE LOGIC PROGRAMS

PROCEEDINGS OF THE YEREVAN STATE UNIVERSITY Physical and Mathematical Sciences 2012 1 p. 43 48 ON FUNCTIONAL SYMBOL-FREE LOGIC PROGRAMS I nf or m at i cs L. A. HAYKAZYAN * Chair of Programming and Information

Subjects, Predicates and The Universal Quantifier

Introduction to Logic Week Sixteen: 14 Jan., 2008 Subjects, Predicates and The Universal Quantifier 000. Office Hours this term: Tuesdays and Wednesdays 1-2, or by appointment; 5B-120. 00. Results from

Rules of Inference Friday, January 18, 2013 Chittu Tripathy Lecture 05

Rules of Inference Today s Menu Rules of Inference Quantifiers: Universal and Existential Nesting of Quantifiers Applications Old Example Re-Revisited Our Old Example: Suppose we have: All human beings

CHAPTER 7 GENERAL PROOF SYSTEMS

CHAPTER 7 GENERAL PROOF SYSTEMS 1 Introduction Proof systems are built to prove statements. They can be thought as an inference machine with special statements, called provable statements, or sometimes

Aikaterini Marazopoulou

Imperial College London Department of Computing Tableau Compiled Labelled Deductive Systems with an application to Description Logics by Aikaterini Marazopoulou Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements

4 Domain Relational Calculus

4 Domain Relational Calculus We now present two relational calculi that we will compare to RA. First, what is the difference between an algebra and a calculus? The usual story is that the algebra RA is

Predicate Logic Review

Predicate Logic Review UC Berkeley, Philosophy 142, Spring 2016 John MacFarlane 1 Grammar A term is an individual constant or a variable. An individual constant is a lowercase letter from the beginning

Handout #1: Mathematical Reasoning

Math 101 Rumbos Spring 2010 1 Handout #1: Mathematical Reasoning 1 Propositional Logic A proposition is a mathematical statement that it is either true or false; that is, a statement whose certainty or

Likewise, we have contradictions: formulas that can only be false, e.g. (p p).

CHAPTER 4. STATEMENT LOGIC 59 The rightmost column of this truth table contains instances of T and instances of F. Notice that there are no degrees of contingency. If both values are possible, the formula

! " # The Logic of Descriptions. Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation. Terminology. Overview. Three Basic Features. Some History on DLs

,!0((,.+#\$),%\$(-&.& *,2(-\$)%&2.'3&%!&, Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation Alessandro Agostini agostini@dit.unitn.it University of Trento Fausto Giunchiglia fausto@dit.unitn.it The Logic of Descriptions!\$%&'()*\$#)

First-Order Stable Model Semantics and First-Order Loop Formulas

Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 42 (2011) 125-180 Submitted 03/11; published 10/11 First-Order Stable Model Semantics and First-Order Loop Formulas Joohyung Lee Yunsong Meng School of Computing,

Logic in general. Inference rules and theorem proving

Logical Agents Knowledge-based agents Logic in general Propositional logic Inference rules and theorem proving First order logic Knowledge-based agents Inference engine Knowledge base Domain-independent

SJÄLVSTÄNDIGA ARBETEN I MATEMATIK

SJÄLVSTÄNDIGA ARBETEN I MATEMATIK MATEMATISKA INSTITUTIONEN, STOCKHOLMS UNIVERSITET Automated Theorem Proving av Tom Everitt 2010 - No 8 MATEMATISKA INSTITUTIONEN, STOCKHOLMS UNIVERSITET, 106 91 STOCKHOLM

Predicate logic Proofs Artificial intelligence. Predicate logic. SET07106 Mathematics for Software Engineering

Predicate logic SET07106 Mathematics for Software Engineering School of Computing Edinburgh Napier University Module Leader: Uta Priss 2010 Copyright Edinburgh Napier University Predicate logic Slide 1/24

CS510 Software Engineering

CS510 Software Engineering Propositional Logic Asst. Prof. Mathias Payer Department of Computer Science Purdue University TA: Scott A. Carr Slides inspired by Xiangyu Zhang http://nebelwelt.net/teaching/15-cs510-se

Consistency, completeness of undecidable preposition of Principia Mathematica. Tanmay Jaipurkar

Consistency, completeness of undecidable preposition of Principia Mathematica Tanmay Jaipurkar October 21, 2013 Abstract The fallowing paper discusses the inconsistency and undecidable preposition of Principia

Computational Logic and Cognitive Science: An Overview

Computational Logic and Cognitive Science: An Overview Session 1: Logical Foundations Technical University of Dresden 25th of August, 2008 University of Osnabrück Who we are Helmar Gust Interests: Analogical

CS 441 Discrete Mathematics for CS Lecture 5. Predicate logic. CS 441 Discrete mathematics for CS. Negation of quantifiers

CS 441 Discrete Mathematics for CS Lecture 5 Predicate logic Milos Hauskrecht milos@cs.pitt.edu 5329 Sennott Square Negation of quantifiers English statement: Nothing is perfect. Translation: x Perfect(x)

Schedule. Logic (master program) Literature & Online Material. gic. Time and Place. Literature. Exercises & Exam. Online Material

OLC mputational gic Schedule Time and Place Thursday, 8:15 9:45, HS E Logic (master program) Georg Moser Institute of Computer Science @ UIBK week 1 October 2 week 8 November 20 week 2 October 9 week 9

(LMCS, p. 317) V.1. First Order Logic. This is the most powerful, most expressive logic that we will examine.

(LMCS, p. 317) V.1 First Order Logic This is the most powerful, most expressive logic that we will examine. Our version of first-order logic will use the following symbols: variables connectives (,,,,

Invalidity in Predicate Logic

Invalidity in Predicate Logic So far we ve got a method for establishing that a predicate logic argument is valid: do a derivation. But we ve got no method for establishing invalidity. In propositional

One More Decidable Class of Finitely Ground Programs

One More Decidable Class of Finitely Ground Programs Yuliya Lierler and Vladimir Lifschitz Department of Computer Sciences, University of Texas at Austin {yuliya,vl}@cs.utexas.edu Abstract. When a logic

DISCRETE MATH: LECTURE 3

DISCRETE MATH: LECTURE 3 DR. DANIEL FREEMAN 1. Chapter 2.2 Conditional Statements If p and q are statement variables, the conditional of q by p is If p then q or p implies q and is denoted p q. It is false

Fun with Henry. Dirk Pattinson Department of Computing Imperial College London

Fun with Henry Dirk Pattinson Department of Computing Imperial College London 1 Example: The Tudors Henry VIII Henry Carey Mary Boleyn There have been speculation that Mary s two children, Catherine and

Expressive powver of logical languages

July 18, 2012 Expressive power distinguishability The expressive power of any language can be measured through its power of distinction or equivalently, by the situations it considers indistinguishable.

1. The algebra of exponents 1.1. Natural Number Powers. It is easy to say what is meant by a n a (raised to) to the (power) n if n N.

CHAPTER 3: EXPONENTS AND POWER FUNCTIONS 1. The algebra of exponents 1.1. Natural Number Powers. It is easy to say what is meant by a n a (raised to) to the (power) n if n N. For example: In general, if

Jaakko Hintikka Boston University. and. Ilpo Halonen University of Helsinki INTERPOLATION AS EXPLANATION

Jaakko Hintikka Boston University and Ilpo Halonen University of Helsinki INTERPOLATION AS EXPLANATION INTERPOLATION AS EXPLANATION In the study of explanation, one can distinguish two main trends. On

Computational Methods for Database Repair by Signed Formulae

Computational Methods for Database Repair by Signed Formulae Ofer Arieli (oarieli@mta.ac.il) Department of Computer Science, The Academic College of Tel-Aviv, 4 Antokolski street, Tel-Aviv 61161, Israel.

Semantics for the Predicate Calculus: Part I

Semantics for the Predicate Calculus: Part I (Version 0.3, revised 6:15pm, April 14, 2005. Please report typos to hhalvors@princeton.edu.) The study of formal logic is based on the fact that the validity

University of Ostrava. Reasoning in Description Logic with Semantic Tableau Binary Trees

University of Ostrava Institute for Research and Applications of Fuzzy Modeling Reasoning in Description Logic with Semantic Tableau Binary Trees Alena Lukasová Research report No. 63 2005 Submitted/to

Correspondence analysis for strong three-valued logic

Correspondence analysis for strong three-valued logic A. Tamminga abstract. I apply Kooi and Tamminga s (2012) idea of correspondence analysis for many-valued logics to strong three-valued logic (K 3 ).

def: An axiom is a statement that is assumed to be true, or in the case of a mathematical system, is used to specify the system.

Section 1.5 Methods of Proof 1.5.1 1.5 METHODS OF PROOF Some forms of argument ( valid ) never lead from correct statements to an incorrect. Some other forms of argument ( fallacies ) can lead from true

First-Order Logics and Truth Degrees

First-Order Logics and Truth Degrees George Metcalfe Mathematics Institute University of Bern LATD 2014, Vienna Summer of Logic, 15-19 July 2014 George Metcalfe (University of Bern) First-Order Logics

Legendre fractional differential equation and Legender fractional polynomials

International Journal of Applied Mathematical Research, 3 (3) (2014) 214-219 c Science Publishing Corporation www.sciencepubco.com/index.php/ijamr doi: 10.14419/ijamr.v3i3.2747 Research Paper Legendre

3.2 The Factor Theorem and The Remainder Theorem

3. The Factor Theorem and The Remainder Theorem 57 3. The Factor Theorem and The Remainder Theorem Suppose we wish to find the zeros of f(x) = x 3 + 4x 5x 4. Setting f(x) = 0 results in the polynomial

Certamen 1 de Representación del Conocimiento

Certamen 1 de Representación del Conocimiento Segundo Semestre 2012 Question: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Total Points: 2 2 1 1 / 2 1 / 2 3 1 1 / 2 1 1 / 2 12 Here we show one way to solve each question, but there

AUTOMATED REASONING SLIDES 3: RESOLUTION The resolution rule Unification Refutation by resolution Factoring Clausal Form and Skolemisation

AUTOMATED REASONING SLIDES 3: RESOLUTION The resolution rule Unification Refutation by resolution Factoring Clausal Form and Skolemisation KB - AR - 09 Resolution Resolution is a clausal refutation system

A first step towards modeling semistructured data in hybrid multimodal logic

A first step towards modeling semistructured data in hybrid multimodal logic Nicole Bidoit * Serenella Cerrito ** Virginie Thion * * LRI UMR CNRS 8623, Université Paris 11, Centre d Orsay. ** LaMI UMR

1 Elementary Set Theory

1 Elementary Set Theory Notation: {} enclose a set. {1, 2, 3} = {3, 2, 2, 1, 3} because a set is not defined by order or multiplicity. {0, 2, 4,...} = {x x is an even natural number} because two ways of

Mathematics for Computer Science/Software Engineering. Notes for the course MSM1F3 Dr. R. A. Wilson

Mathematics for Computer Science/Software Engineering Notes for the course MSM1F3 Dr. R. A. Wilson October 1996 Chapter 1 Logic Lecture no. 1. We introduce the concept of a proposition, which is a statement

A Beginner s Guide to Modern Set Theory

A Beginner s Guide to Modern Set Theory Martin Dowd Product of Hyperon Software PO Box 4161 Costa Mesa, CA 92628 www.hyperonsoft.com Copyright c 2010 by Martin Dowd 1. Introduction..... 1 2. Formal logic......

INTRODUCTORY SET THEORY

M.Sc. program in mathematics INTRODUCTORY SET THEORY Katalin Károlyi Department of Applied Analysis, Eötvös Loránd University H-1088 Budapest, Múzeum krt. 6-8. CONTENTS 1. SETS Set, equal sets, subset,

CmSc 175 Discrete Mathematics Lesson 10: SETS A B, A B

CmSc 175 Discrete Mathematics Lesson 10: SETS Sets: finite, infinite, : empty set, U : universal set Describing a set: Enumeration = {a, b, c} Predicates = {x P(x)} Recursive definition, e.g. sequences

Discrete Mathematics and Probability Theory Fall 2009 Satish Rao, David Tse Note 2

CS 70 Discrete Mathematics and Probability Theory Fall 2009 Satish Rao, David Tse Note 2 Proofs Intuitively, the concept of proof should already be familiar We all like to assert things, and few of us

3. Mathematical Induction

3. MATHEMATICAL INDUCTION 83 3. Mathematical Induction 3.1. First Principle of Mathematical Induction. Let P (n) be a predicate with domain of discourse (over) the natural numbers N = {0, 1,,...}. If (1)

Chapter 1. Use the following to answer questions 1-5: In the questions below determine whether the proposition is TRUE or FALSE

Use the following to answer questions 1-5: Chapter 1 In the questions below determine whether the proposition is TRUE or FALSE 1. 1 + 1 = 3 if and only if 2 + 2 = 3. 2. If it is raining, then it is raining.

On Formally Undecidable Propositions of Principia Mathematica And Related Systems

On Formally Undecidable Propositions of Principia Mathematica And Related Systems KURT GÖDEL Translated by B. MELTZER Introduction by R. B. BRAITHWAITE TO CHRISTOPHER FERNAU in gratitude FL: Page 1 11/10/00

Turing Degrees and Definability of the Jump. Theodore A. Slaman. University of California, Berkeley. CJuly, 2005

Turing Degrees and Definability of the Jump Theodore A. Slaman University of California, Berkeley CJuly, 2005 Outline Lecture 1 Forcing in arithmetic Coding and decoding theorems Automorphisms of countable

This asserts two sets are equal iff they have the same elements, that is, a set is determined by its elements.

3. Axioms of Set theory Before presenting the axioms of set theory, we first make a few basic comments about the relevant first order logic. We will give a somewhat more detailed discussion later, but

Lecture Notes in Discrete Mathematics Marcel B. Finan Arkansas Tech University c All Rights Reserved 2 Preface This book is designed for a one semester course in discrete mathematics for sophomore or junior

2. Methods of Proof Types of Proofs. Suppose we wish to prove an implication p q. Here are some strategies we have available to try.

2. METHODS OF PROOF 69 2. Methods of Proof 2.1. Types of Proofs. Suppose we wish to prove an implication p q. Here are some strategies we have available to try. Trivial Proof: If we know q is true then

Foundations of mathematics

Foundations of mathematics 1. First foundations of mathematics 1.1. Introduction to the foundations of mathematics Mathematics, theories and foundations Sylvain Poirier http://settheory.net/ Mathematics

Temporal Logics. Computation Tree Logic

Temporal Logics CTL: definition, relationship between operators, adequate sets, specifying properties, safety/liveness/fairness Modeling: sequential, concurrent systems; maximum parallelism/interleaving

Computability Theory

CSC 438F/2404F Notes (S. Cook and T. Pitassi) Fall, 2014 Computability Theory This section is partly inspired by the material in A Course in Mathematical Logic by Bell and Machover, Chap 6, sections 1-10.

Fixed-Point Logics and Computation

1 Fixed-Point Logics and Computation Symposium on the Unusual Effectiveness of Logic in Computer Science University of Cambridge 2 Mathematical Logic Mathematical logic seeks to formalise the process of

Introduction to Modern Set Theory

Introduction to Modern Set Theory Judith Roitman December 6, 2011 1 for my father, who loved mathematics 1 Revised Edition Copyright 2011 by Judith Roitman, This book is licensed for use under a Creative

If an English sentence is ambiguous, it may allow for more than one adequate transcription.

Transcription from English to Predicate Logic General Principles of Transcription In transcribing an English sentence into Predicate Logic, some general principles apply. A transcription guide must be

Deduction by Daniel Bonevac. Chapter 5 Quantifiers

Deduction by Daniel Bonevac Chapter 5 Quantifiers Limitations of sentential logic Sentential logic is useful, but there are many logical relationships that it simply can not represent. For example, sentential

Formal Logic, Algorithms, and Incompleteness! Robert Stengel! Robotics and Intelligent Systems MAE 345, Princeton University, 2015

Formal Logic, Algorithms, and Incompleteness! Robert Stengel! Robotics and Intelligent Systems MAE 345, Princeton University, 2015 Learning Objectives!! Principles of axiomatic systems and formal logic!!

Knowledge Representation: Logic

Knowledge Representation: Logic Wojciech Jaworski Institute of Informatics University of Warsaw Wojciech Jaworski (MIM UW) Logic 1 / 36 What is Knowledge Representation? Expressing knowledge of certain

Consistent Answers from Integrated Data Sources

Consistent Answers from Integrated Data Sources Leopoldo Bertossi 1, Jan Chomicki 2 Alvaro Cortés 3, and Claudio Gutiérrez 4 1 Carleton University, School of Computer Science, Ottawa, Canada. bertossi@scs.carleton.ca

Introduction to Automata Theory. Reading: Chapter 1

Introduction to Automata Theory Reading: Chapter 1 1 What is Automata Theory? Study of abstract computing devices, or machines Automaton = an abstract computing device Note: A device need not even be a

Mathematical Induction

Mathematical Induction In logic, we often want to prove that every member of an infinite set has some feature. E.g., we would like to show: N 1 : is a number 1 : has the feature Φ ( x)(n 1 x! 1 x) How

Beyond Propositional Logic Lukasiewicz s System

Beyond Propositional Logic Lukasiewicz s System Consider the following set of truth tables: 1 0 0 1 # # 1 0 # 1 1 0 # 0 0 0 0 # # 0 # 1 0 # 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 # # 1 # # 1 0 # 1 1 0 # 0 1 1 1 # 1 # 1 Brandon

Predicate logic is an Extension of sentence logic. Several new vocabulary items are found in predicate logic.

Atomic Sentences of Predicate Logic Predicate Logic and Sentence Logic Predicate logic is an Extension of sentence logic. All items of the vocabulary of sentence logic are items of the vocabulary of predicate

Modeling access. Queries. Relational query languages. Tuple Relational Calculus. begin with Relational Calculus. Relational model: Relational calculus

COS 597A: Principles of Database and Information Systems Relational model: Relational calculus Modeling access Have looked at modeling information as data + structure Now: how model access to data in relational

The Foundations of Mathematics

The Foundations of Mathematics c 2005,2006,2007 Kenneth Kunen Kenneth Kunen October 29, 2007 Contents 0 Introduction 3 0.1 Prerequisites.................................. 3 0.2 Logical Notation...............................

Summary Last Lecture. Automated Reasoning. Outline of the Lecture. Definition sequent calculus. Theorem (Normalisation and Strong Normalisation)

Summary Summary Last Lecture sequent calculus Automated Reasoning Georg Moser Institute of Computer Science @ UIBK Winter 013 (Normalisation and Strong Normalisation) let Π be a proof in minimal logic

Introduction to Logic in Computer Science: Autumn 2006

Introduction to Logic in Computer Science: Autumn 2006 Ulle Endriss Institute for Logic, Language and Computation University of Amsterdam Ulle Endriss 1 Plan for Today Now that we have a basic understanding

Discrete Mathematics Lecture 3 Elementary Number Theory and Methods of Proof. Harper Langston New York University

Discrete Mathematics Lecture 3 Elementary Number Theory and Methods of Proof Harper Langston New York University Proof and Counterexample Discovery and proof Even and odd numbers number n from Z is called

First-order Logic: Theory and Practice

First-order Logic: Theory and Practice The Tableau Calculus Jens Otten University of Potsdam Jens Otten (University of Potsdam) First-order Logic: Tableau Calculus FU Berlin (SS 2012/2013) 1 / 11 Outline

Using Tableau to Decide Description Logics with Full Role Negation and Identity

Using Tableau to Decide Description Logics with Full Role Negation and Identity RENATE A. SCHMIDT and DMITRY TISHKOVSKY, The University of Manchester, UK This paper presents a tableau approach for deciding

Relational Calculus. Module 3, Lecture 2. Database Management Systems, R. Ramakrishnan 1

Relational Calculus Module 3, Lecture 2 Database Management Systems, R. Ramakrishnan 1 Relational Calculus Comes in two flavours: Tuple relational calculus (TRC) and Domain relational calculus (DRC). Calculus

Computer Algebra for Computer Engineers

p.1/14 Computer Algebra for Computer Engineers Preliminaries Priyank Kalla Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering University of Utah, Salt Lake City p.2/14 Notation R: Real Numbers Q: Fractions

Relational Calculus. Chapter Comp 521 Files and Databases Spring

Relational Calculus Chapter 4.3-4.5 Comp 521 Files and Databases Spring 2010 1 Relational Calculus Comes in two flavors: Tuple relational calculus (TRC) and Domain relational calculus (DRC). Calculus has

Remarks on Non-Fregean Logic

STUDIES IN LOGIC, GRAMMAR AND RHETORIC 10 (23) 2007 Remarks on Non-Fregean Logic Mieczys law Omy la Institute of Philosophy University of Warsaw Poland m.omyla@uw.edu.pl 1 Introduction In 1966 famous Polish

the type checking problem (TCP) schema the proof checking problem the type synthesis problem (TSP) decidability input: Γ M :? polymorphism in Coq

schema the type checking problem (TCP) decidability polymorphism in Coq dependent inductive data-types in Coq further reading overview input: Γ M : N? output: true yes the typing judgement is derivable

Lecture 2: Query Containment

CS 838: Foundations of Data Management Spring 2016 Lecture 2: Query Containment Instructor: Paris Koutris 2016 In this lecture we will study when we can say that two conjunctive queries that are syntactically

Query Answering in Inconsistent Databases Leopoldo Bertossi 1 and Jan Chomicki 2 1 School of Computer Science, Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada, bertossi@scs.carleton.ca 2 Dept. of Computer Science

for the Logic Manual by Peter Fritz Oxford

MOR E E X E RC I SE S for the Logic Manual by Peter Fritz Oxford 16th February 2014 Preface by Volker Halbach This booklet contains additional exercises for the Logic Manual with solutions. The student

M10_COPI1396_13_SE_C10.QXD 10/22/07 8:42 AM Page 445 10.4 Traditional Subject Predicate Propositions 445 Continuing to assume the existence of at least one individual, we can say, referring to this square,

Logical Agents. Explorations in Artificial Intelligence. Knowledge-based Agents. Knowledge-base Agents. Outline. Knowledge bases

Logical Agents Explorations in Artificial Intelligence rof. Carla. Gomes gomes@cs.cornell.edu Agents that are able to: Form representations of the world Use a process to derive new representations of the

Mathematical Induction. Lecture 10-11

Mathematical Induction Lecture 10-11 Menu Mathematical Induction Strong Induction Recursive Definitions Structural Induction Climbing an Infinite Ladder Suppose we have an infinite ladder: 1. We can reach