# Propositional Logic and Methods of Inference SEEM

Save this PDF as:

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "Propositional Logic and Methods of Inference SEEM"

## Transcription

1 Propositional Logic and Methods of Inference SEEM

2 Logic Knowledge can also be represented by the symbols of logic, which is the study of the rules of exact reasoning. Logic is also of primary importance in expert systems in which the inference engine reasons from facts to conclusions. A descriptive term for logic programming and expert systems is automated reasoning systems. SEEM

3 Propositional logic Formal logic is concerned with the syntax of statements, not their semantics An example of formal logic, consider the following clauses with nonsense words squeeg and moof Premise: All squeegs are moofs Premise: John is a squeeg Conclusion: John is a moof The argument is valid no matter what words are used Premise: All X are Y Premise: Z is a X Conclusion: Z is a Y is valid no matter what is substituted for X, Y, and Z Separating the form from the semantics, the validity of an argument can be considered objectively, without prejudice caused by the semantic SEEM

4 Propositional logic Propositional logic is a symbolic logic for manipulating propositions propositional logic deals with the manipulation of logical variables, which represent propositions Propositional logic is concerned with the subset of declarative sentences that can be classified as either true or false SEEM

5 Propositional logic A sentence whose truth value can be determined is called a statement or proposition A statement is also called a closed sentence because its truth value is not open to question Statements that cannot be answered absolutely are called open sentences A compound statement is formed by using logical connectives on individual statements SEEM

6 Propositional logic The conditional is analogous to the arrow of production rules in that it is expressed as an IF-THEN form. For example: if it is raining then carry an umbrella p q where p = it is raining q = carry an umbrella The bi-conditional, p q, is equivalent to: (p q) ^ (q p) and has the following meanings: p if and only if q q if and only if p if p then q, and if q then p SEEM

7 Propositional logic A tautology is a compound statement that is always true. A contradiction is a compound statement that is always false A contingent statement is one that is neither a tautology nor a contradiction For example, the truth table of p v ~p shows it is a tautology. while p ^ ~p is a contradiction If a conditional is also a tautology, then it is called an implication and has the symbol => in place of A bi-conditional that is also a tautology is called a logical equivalence or material equivalence and is symbolized by either or SEEM

8 Propositional logic In logic, the conditional is defined by its truth table, e.g. p q where p and q are any statements, this can be translated as: p implies q if p then q p, only if q if p p is necessary for p For example, let p represent you are 18 or older and q represents you can vote you are 18 or older implies you can vote if you are 18 or older then you can vote you are 18 or older, only if you can vote you are 18 or older is sufficient for you can vote you can vote if you are 18 or older you can vote is necessary for you are 18 or older SEEM

9 Propositional logic A set of logical connectives is adequate if every truth function can be represented using only the connectives from the adequate set. Examples of adequate sets are The" " operator is called a stroke or alternative denial. It is used to deny that both p and q are true. p q affirms that at least one of the statements p or q is true The joint denial operator,, denies that either p or q is true p q affirms that both p and q are false SEEM

10 Propositional logic SEEM

11 Propositional logic p q p q ~p ~p v q T T T F T T F F F F F T T T T F F T T T Note that p q is equivalent to ~p v q SEEM

12 Rules of inference In a formal way, A = There is power B = The computer will work A B A :. B A general schema: p q p :. q where p and q are logical variables that can represent any statements SEEM

13 Rules of inference The use of logical variables in propositional logic allows more complex types. Inference schema of this propositional form is called by a variety of names: direct reasoning, modus ponens, law of detachment, and assuming the antecedent This modus ponens schema could also have been written with differently named logical variables as: r s r :. s Another notation for this schema is: r, r s; :. s A more general form of an argument is: P 1, P 2, P N ; :. C where the uppercase letters P i represent premises such as r, r s, and C is the conclusion SEEM

14 Rules of inference An analogous argument for production rules can be written in the general form: if the premises and conclusion are all schemata, the argument: P 1, P 2, P N ; :. C is a formally valid deductive argument if and only if: is a tautology. is a tautology, as it is true for any values of p and q SEEM

15 Rules of inference SEEM

16 Rules of inference A shorter method of determining a valid argument is to consider only those rows of the truth table in which the premises are all true For modus ponens, the p q premise and p premise are both true only in the first row, and so is the conclusion. Hence, modus ponens is a valid argument SEEM

17 Rules of inference Arguments can be deceptive If there are no bugs, then the program compiles There are no bugs :. The program compiles If there are no bugs, then the program compiles The program compiles :. There are no bugs Is this a valid argument? The schema for arguments of this type is p q q :. p SEEM

18 Rules of inference The argument is not valid The third row shows that if the premises are true, the conclusion is false This particular fallacious argument is called the fallacy of the converse. The converse is defined in Table 3.9 SEEM

19 Rules of inference Another example: p q ~q :. ~p is valid This particular schema is called by a variety of names: indirect reasoning, modus tollens, and law of contraposition SEEM

20 SEEM

21 Rules of inference The rules of inference can be applied to arguments with more than two premises Chip prices rise only if the yen rises. The yen rises only if the dollar falls and if the dollar falls then the yen rises. Since chip prices have risen, the dollar must have fallen Let the propositions be: The argument: C = chip prices rise Y = yen rises D = dollar falls SEEM

22 Rules of inference If the conditional p q and its converse q p are both true, then p and q are equivalent p q ^ q p is equivalent to the biconditional p q or equivalence p q The argument becomes: Since Y and D are equivalent from (2), we can substitute D for Y in (1) to yield (4) (4) C D (3) C :. D Hence the argument is valid SEEM

23 Rules of inference The rule of substitution the substitution of one variable that is equivalent to another is a rule of inference called the rule of substitution The rules of modus ponens and substitution are two basic rules of deductive logic SEEM

24 Resolution Resolution makes automatic theorem provers practical tools for solving problems. Before resolution can be applied, the well-formed formulas (wffs) must be in a normal or standard form. The three main types of normal forms are conjunctive normal form, clausal form, and its Horn clause subset The basic idea of normal form is to express wffs in a standard form that uses only the ^, v, and possibly ~ The resolution method is then applied to normal form wffs in which all other connectives and quantifiers have been eliminated Resolution is an operation on pairs of disjuncts, which produces new disjuncts, which simplifies the wff SEEM

25 Resolution A wff in conjunctive normal form Terms such as P i, must be literals, which mean that they contain no logical connectives such as the conditional and biconditional, or quantifiers A literal is an atomic formula or a negated atomic formula For example, the following wff is in conjunctive normal form: The terms within parentheses are clauses: SEEM

26 Resolution The full clausal form can express any predicate logic formula but may not be as natural or readable for a person A full clausal form expression is generally written in a special form called Kowalski clausal form: A 1, A 2, A N B 1, B 2, B M if all the subgoals A 1, A 2, A N are true, then one or more of B 1, or B 2, or B M are true also This clause, written in standard logical notation, is: SEEM

27 Resolution This can be expressed in disjunctive form as the disjunction of literals using the equivalence: SEEM

28 Resolution The problem with trying to prove a theorem directly the difficulty of deducing it using only the rules of inference and axioms of the system To prove a theorem is true the classical method of reductio ad absurdum, or method of contradiction, is used We try to prove the negated wff is a theorem. If a contradiction results, then the original non-negated wff is a theorem. The basic goal of resolution is to infer a new clause, the resolvent, from two other clauses called parent clauses By continuing the process of resolution, eventually a contradiction will be obtained or the process is terminated because no progress is being made SEEM

29 Resolution A simple example of resolution consider the following two clauses: by writing the premises as: One of the Axioms of Distribution is: Applying this to the premises gives: SEEM

30 Resolution SEEM

31 Resolution systems and deduction Given wffs A 1, A 2, A N and a logical conclusion or theorem C, we know: SEEM

32 Resolution systems and deduction SEEM

33 Resolution systems and deduction if (1) is valid, then its negation (2) must be invalid. if (1) is a tautology then (2) must be a contradiction. Formulas (1) and (2) represent two equivalent ways of proving that a formula C is a theorem. Formula (1) can be used to prove a theorem by checking to see if it is true in all cases. Formula (2) can be used to prove a theorem by showing (2) leads to a contradiction. Proving a theorem by showing its negation leads to a contradiction is proof by reductio ad absurdum. The primary part of this type of proof is the refutation. Resolution is a sound rule of inference that is also refutation complete because the empty clause will always be the eventual result if there is a contradiction in the set of clauses. Resolution refutation will terminate in a finite number of steps if there is a contradiction SEEM

34 Resolution systems and deduction As a simple example of proof by resolution refutation, consider the argument: A B B C C D :. A D To prove that the conclusion A D is a theorem by resolution refutation, first convert it to disjunctive form using the equivalence: SEEM

35 Resolution systems and deduction and its negation is: The conjunction of the disjunctive forms of the premises and the negated conclusion gives the conjunctive normal form suitable for resolution refutation SEEM

36 Shallow and causal reasoning Resolution systems and production rule systems are two popular paradigms for proving theorems Consider an expert system that uses an inference chain a longer chain represents more causal or deep knowledge shallow reasoning commonly uses a single rule or a few inferences The quality of knowledge in the rules is also a major factor in determining deep and shallow reasoning The conclusion of an inference chain is a theorem because it is proven by the chain of inference, as demonstrated by the previous example: Expert systems that use an inference chain to establish a conclusion are really using theorems Instead, expert systems would be restricted to shallow inferences of single rules with no chaining SEEM

37 Shallow and causal reasoning Consider the following rule (1) IF a car has a good battery good sparkplugs gas good tires THEN the car can move Explanation facility: if the user asked how the car can move, the expert system could respond by listing its conditional elements: a good battery good sparkplugs gas good tires SEEM

38 Shallow and causal reasoning This rule is also an example of shallow reasoning there is little or no understanding of cause and effect in shallow reasoning because there is little or no inference chain In shallow reasoning there is little or no causal chain of cause and effect from one rule to another. In the simplest case, the cause and effect are contained in one with no relationship to any other rule The advantage of shallow reasoning compared to causal reasoning: the ease of programming Frame are useful for causal or deep reasoning SEEM

39 Shallow and causal reasoning We can add simple causal reasoning to our rule by defining additional rules such as: (2) IF the battery is good THEN there is electricity (3) IF there is electricity and the sparkplugs are good THEN the sparkplugs will fire (4) IF the sparkplugs fire and there is gas THEN the engine will run (5) IF the engine runs and there are good tires THEN the car will move with causal reasoning, the explanation facility can give a good explanation of what each car component does since each element is specified by a rule SEEM

40 Shallow and causal reasoning Causal reasoning can be used to construct a model of the real system that behaves in all respects like the real system However, causal models are neither always necessary nor desirable. For example, the classic MUD expert system serves as a consultant to drilling fluid or mud engineers A causal system would not be of much use because the drilling engineer cannot normally observe the causal chain of events occurring far below the ground The situation is very different in medicine where physicians have a wide range of diagnostic tests that can be used to verify intermediate events Another reason for not using causal reasoning in MUD is that there are a limited number of diagnostic possibilities and symptoms SEEM

41 Shallow and causal reasoning Because of the increased requirements for causal reasoning, it may become necessary to combine certain rules into a shallow reasoning one. The resolution method with refutation can be used to prove that a single rule is a true conclusion of multiple rules Suppose to prove that rule (1) is a logical conclusion of rules (2) - (5) Using the following propositional definitions B = battery is good C = car will move E = there is electricity F = sparkplugs will fire G = there is gas R = engine will run S = sparkplugs are good T = there are good tires SEEM

42 Shallow and causal reasoning The first step in applying resolution refutation is to negate the conclusion or goal rule: Now each of the other rules is expressed in disjunctive form using equivalences such as: SEEM

43 Shallow and causal reasoning to yield the following new versions of (2) - (5): SEEM

44 Shallow and causal reasoning Starting at the top of the tree, the clauses are represented as nodes, which are resolved to produce the resolvent below. For example are resolved to infer: which is then resolved with: Since the root of the tree is nil, this is a contradiction. By refutation, is a theorem since its negation leads to a contradiction. Thus rule (1) does logically follow from rules (2) - (5). SEEM

### 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

### 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

### 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

### 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

### CHAPTER 1. Logic, Proofs Propositions

CHAPTER 1 Logic, Proofs 1.1. Propositions A proposition is a declarative sentence that is either true or false (but not both). For instance, the following are propositions: Paris is in France (true), London

### 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

### 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)

### 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

### 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

### CHAPTER 2. Logic. 1. Logic Definitions. Notation: Variables are used to represent propositions. The most common variables used are p, q, and r.

CHAPTER 2 Logic 1. Logic Definitions 1.1. Propositions. Definition 1.1.1. A proposition is a declarative sentence that is either true (denoted either T or 1) or false (denoted either F or 0). Notation:

### 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

### CSL105: Discrete Mathematical Structures. Ragesh Jaiswal, CSE, IIT Delhi

Propositional Logic: logical operators Negation ( ) Conjunction ( ) Disjunction ( ). Exclusive or ( ) Conditional statement ( ) Bi-conditional statement ( ): Let p and q be propositions. The biconditional

### 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

### 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

### 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)

### Propositional Logic. Definition: A proposition or statement is a sentence which is either true or false.

Propositional Logic Definition: A proposition or statement is a sentence which is either true or false. Definition:If a proposition is true, then we say its truth value is true, and if a proposition is

### 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.

### 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

### 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

### Logic Appendix. Section 1 Truth Tables CONJUNCTION EXAMPLE 1

Logic Appendix T F F T Section 1 Truth Tables Recall that a statement is a group of words or symbols that can be classified collectively as true or false. The claim 5 7 12 is a true statement, whereas

### 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

### Generalized Modus Ponens

Generalized Modus Ponens This rule allows us to derive an implication... True p 1 and... p i and... p n p 1... p i-1 and p i+1... p n implies p i implies q implies q allows: a 1 and... a i and... a n implies

### 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 ).

### Foundations of Artificial Intelligence. Knowledge Representation and Reasoning

Foundations of Artificial Intelligence Knowledge Representation and Reasoning Knowledge Based Systems The field of knowledge engineering can be defined as the process of assessing problems, acquiring knowledge

### Solutions Q1, Q3, Q4.(a), Q5, Q6 to INTLOGS16 Test 1

Solutions Q1, Q3, Q4.(a), Q5, Q6 to INTLOGS16 Test 1 Prof S Bringsjord 0317161200NY Contents I Problems 1 II Solutions 3 Solution to Q1 3 Solutions to Q3 4 Solutions to Q4.(a) (i) 4 Solution to Q4.(a)........................................

### 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

### 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

### 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

### Introduction to Proofs

Chapter 1 Introduction to Proofs 1.1 Preview of Proof This section previews many of the key ideas of proof and cites [in brackets] the sections where they are discussed thoroughly. All of these ideas are

### 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

### Foundational Proof Certificates

An application of proof theory to computer science INRIA-Saclay & LIX, École Polytechnique CUSO Winter School, Proof and Computation 30 January 2013 Can we standardize, communicate, and trust formal proofs?

### 1 Propositional Logic

1 Propositional Logic Propositions 1.1 Definition A declarative sentence is a sentence that declares a fact or facts. Example 1 The earth is spherical. 7 + 1 = 6 + 2 x 2 > 0 for all real numbers x. 1 =

### 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

### WHAT ARE MATHEMATICAL PROOFS AND WHY THEY ARE IMPORTANT?

WHAT ARE MATHEMATICAL PROOFS AND WHY THEY ARE IMPORTANT? introduction Many students seem to have trouble with the notion of a mathematical proof. People that come to a course like Math 216, who certainly

### 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

### 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,

### Lecture Notes in Discrete Mathematics. Marcel B. Finan Arkansas Tech University c All Rights Reserved

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

### Math 3000 Section 003 Intro to Abstract Math Homework 2

Math 3000 Section 003 Intro to Abstract Math Homework 2 Department of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences University of Colorado Denver, Spring 2012 Solutions (February 13, 2012) Please note that these

### Elementary Number Theory and Methods of Proof. CSE 215, Foundations of Computer Science Stony Brook University http://www.cs.stonybrook.

Elementary Number Theory and Methods of Proof CSE 215, Foundations of Computer Science Stony Brook University http://www.cs.stonybrook.edu/~cse215 1 Number theory Properties: 2 Properties of integers (whole

### Hypothetical Syllogisms 1

Phil 2302 Intro to Logic Dr. Naugle Hypothetical Syllogisms 1 Compound syllogisms are composed of different kinds of sentences in their premises and conclusions (not just categorical propositions, statements

### 24. PARAPHRASING COMPLEX STATEMENTS

Chapter 4: Translations in Sentential Logic 125 24. PARAPHRASING COMPLEX STATEMENTS As noted earlier, compound statements may be built up from statements which are themselves compound statements. There

### Artificial Intelligence. Knowledge Representation

RC Chakraborty 03/03 to 08/3, 2007, Lecture 15 to 22 (8 hrs) Slides 1 to 79 myreaders, http://myreaders.wordpress.com/, rcchak@gmail.com (Revised Feb. 02, 2008) Artificial Intelligence Knowledge Representation

### A Few Basics of Probability

A Few Basics of Probability Philosophy 57 Spring, 2004 1 Introduction This handout distinguishes between inductive and deductive logic, and then introduces probability, a concept essential to the study

### Development of a computer system to support knowledge acquisition of basic logical forms using fairy tale "Alice in Wonderland"

Development of a computer system to support knowledge acquisition of basic logical forms using fairy tale "Alice in Wonderland" Antonija Mihaljević Španjić *, Alen Jakupović *, Matea Tomić * * Polytechnic

### 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

### (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 (,,,,

### 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

### Knowledge base. Logical agents. A simple knowledge-based agent. Outline

Knowledge bases Inference engine domain independent algorithms ogical agents Chapter 7 Knowledge base domain specific content Knowledge base = set of sentences in a formal language Declarative approach

### Applications of Methods of Proof

CHAPTER 4 Applications of Methods of Proof 1. Set Operations 1.1. Set Operations. The set-theoretic operations, intersection, union, and complementation, defined in Chapter 1.1 Introduction to Sets are

### Examination paper for MA0301 Elementær diskret matematikk

Department of Mathematical Sciences Examination paper for MA0301 Elementær diskret matematikk Academic contact during examination: Iris Marjan Smit a, Sverre Olaf Smalø b Phone: a 9285 0781, b 7359 1750

### 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

### 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

### Chapter 3. Cartesian Products and Relations. 3.1 Cartesian Products

Chapter 3 Cartesian Products and Relations The material in this chapter is the first real encounter with abstraction. Relations are very general thing they are a special type of subset. After introducing

### Cosmological Arguments for the Existence of God S. Clarke

Cosmological Arguments for the Existence of God S. Clarke [Modified Fall 2009] 1. Large class of arguments. Sometimes they get very complex, as in Clarke s argument, but the basic idea is simple. Lets

### Symbolic Logic on the TI-92

Symbolic Logic on the TI-92 Presented by Lin McMullin The Sixth Conference on the Teaching of Mathematics June 20 & 21, 1997 Milwaukee, Wisconsin 1 Lin McMullin Mathematics Department Representative, Burnt

### 4.1. Definitions. A set may be viewed as any well defined collection of objects, called elements or members of the set.

Section 4. Set Theory 4.1. Definitions A set may be viewed as any well defined collection of objects, called elements or members of the set. Sets are usually denoted with upper case letters, A, B, X, Y,

### Resolution. Informatics 1 School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh

Resolution In this lecture you will see how to convert the natural proof system of previous lectures into one with fewer operators and only one proof rule. You will see how this proof system can be used

### 196 Chapter 7. Logical Agents

7 LOGICAL AGENTS In which we design agents that can form representations of the world, use a process of inference to derive new representations about the world, and use these new representations to deduce

### Foundations of Logic and Mathematics

Yves Nievergelt Foundations of Logic and Mathematics Applications to Computer Science and Cryptography Birkhäuser Boston Basel Berlin Contents Preface Outline xiii xv A Theory 1 0 Boolean Algebraic Logic

### 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

### Copyright 2012 MECS I.J.Information Technology and Computer Science, 2012, 1, 50-63

I.J. Information Technology and Computer Science, 2012, 1, 50-63 Published Online February 2012 in MECS (http://www.mecs-press.org/) DOI: 10.5815/ijitcs.2012.01.07 Using Logic Programming to Represent

### Florida State University Course Notes MAD 2104 Discrete Mathematics I

Florida State University Course Notes MAD 2104 Discrete Mathematics I Florida State University Tallahassee, Florida 32306-4510 Copyright c 2011 Florida State University Written by Dr. John Bryant and Dr.

### 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

### WOLLONGONG COLLEGE AUSTRALIA. Diploma in Information Technology

First Name: Family Name: Student Number: Class/Tutorial: WOLLONGONG COLLEGE AUSTRALIA A College of the University of Wollongong Diploma in Information Technology Final Examination Spring Session 2008 WUCT121

### 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

### 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

### ! " # 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!\$%&'()*\$#)

### EQUATIONAL LOGIC AND ABSTRACT ALGEBRA * ABSTRACT

EQUATIONAL LOGIC AND ABSTRACT ALGEBRA * Taje I. Ramsamujh Florida International University Mathematics Department ABSTRACT Equational logic is a formalization of the deductive methods encountered in studying

### 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,

### Chapter II. Controlling Cars on a Bridge

Chapter II. Controlling Cars on a Bridge 1 Introduction The intent of this chapter is to introduce a complete example of a small system development. During this development, you will be made aware of the

### 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

### 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

### WRITING PROOFS. Christopher Heil Georgia Institute of Technology

WRITING PROOFS Christopher Heil Georgia Institute of Technology A theorem is just a statement of fact A proof of the theorem is a logical explanation of why the theorem is true Many theorems have this

### 1.2 Forms and Validity

1.2 Forms and Validity Deductive Logic is the study of methods for determining whether or not an argument is valid. In this section we identify some famous valid argument forms. Argument Forms Consider

### Quine on truth by convention

Quine on truth by convention March 8, 2005 1 Linguistic explanations of necessity and the a priori.............. 1 2 Relative and absolute truth by definition.................... 2 3 Is logic true by convention?...........................

### Day 2: Logic and Proof

Day 2: Logic and Proof George E. Hrabovsky MAST Introduction This is the second installment of the series. Here I intend to present the ideas and methods of proof. Logic and proof To begin with, I will

### Truth Trees for Sentence Logic

Truth Trees for Sentence Logic Applications what the rules are supposed to do. Our objective is to make line 1 true, in all the minimally sufficient ways that this can be done. Because line 1 is a disjunction,

### Introduction to Logic: Argumentation and Interpretation. Vysoká škola mezinárodních a veřejných vztahů PhDr. Peter Jan Kosmály, Ph.D. 9. 3.

Introduction to Logic: Argumentation and Interpretation Vysoká škola mezinárodních a veřejných vztahů PhDr. Peter Jan Kosmály, Ph.D. 9. 3. 2016 tests. Introduction to Logic: Argumentation and Interpretation

### Neighborhood Data and Database Security

Neighborhood Data and Database Security Kioumars Yazdanian, FrkdCric Cuppens e-mail: yaz@ tls-cs.cert.fr - cuppens@ tls-cs.cert.fr CERT / ONERA, Dept. of Computer Science 2 avenue E. Belin, B.P. 4025,31055

### Basic Proof Techniques

Basic Proof Techniques David Ferry dsf43@truman.edu September 13, 010 1 Four Fundamental Proof Techniques When one wishes to prove the statement P Q there are four fundamental approaches. This document

### High Integrity Software Conference, Albuquerque, New Mexico, October 1997.

Meta-Amphion: Scaling up High-Assurance Deductive Program Synthesis Steve Roach Recom Technologies NASA Ames Research Center Code IC, MS 269-2 Moffett Field, CA 94035 sroach@ptolemy.arc.nasa.gov Jeff Van

### 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

### 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

### We would like to state the following system of natural deduction rules preserving falsity:

A Natural Deduction System Preserving Falsity 1 Wagner de Campos Sanz Dept. of Philosophy/UFG/Brazil sanz@fchf.ufg.br Abstract This paper presents a natural deduction system preserving falsity. This new

### 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

### Geometry: 2.1-2.3 Notes

Geometry: 2.1-2.3 Notes NAME 2.1 Be able to write all types of conditional statements. Date: Define Vocabulary: conditional statement if-then form hypothesis conclusion negation converse inverse contrapositive

### Solutions to Homework 6 Mathematics 503 Foundations of Mathematics Spring 2014

Solutions to Homework 6 Mathematics 503 Foundations of Mathematics Spring 2014 3.4: 1. If m is any integer, then m(m + 1) = m 2 + m is the product of m and its successor. That it to say, m 2 + m is the

### 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,

### Example: Backward Chaining. Inference Strategy: Backward Chaining. First-Order Logic. Knowledge Engineering. Example: Proof

Inference Strategy: Backward Chaining Idea: Check whether a particular fact q is true. Backward Chaining: Given a fact q to be proven, 1. See if q is already in the KB. If so, return TRUE. 2. Find all

### 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

### Slippery Slopes and Vagueness

Slippery Slopes and Vagueness Slippery slope reasoning, typically taken as a fallacy. But what goes wrong? Is it always bad reasoning? How should we respond to a slippery slope argument and/or guard against

### Removing Partial Inconsistency in Valuation- Based Systems*

Removing Partial Inconsistency in Valuation- Based Systems* Luis M. de Campos and Serafín Moral Departamento de Ciencias de la Computación e I.A., Universidad de Granada, 18071 Granada, Spain This paper

### Clue Deduction: an introduction to satisfiability reasoning

Clue Deduction: an introduction to satisfiability reasoning Todd W. Neller, Zdravko Markov, Ingrid Russell July 25, 2005 1 Introduction Clue R 1 is a mystery-themed game of deduction. The goal of the game

### 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

### We now explore a third method of proof: proof by contradiction.

CHAPTER 6 Proof by Contradiction We now explore a third method of proof: proof by contradiction. This method is not limited to proving just conditional statements it can be used to prove any kind of statement

### 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.

### Answer Key for California State Standards: Algebra I

Algebra I: Symbolic reasoning and calculations with symbols are central in algebra. Through the study of algebra, a student develops an understanding of the symbolic language of mathematics and the sciences.

### Trust but Verify: Authorization for Web Services. The University of Vermont

Trust but Verify: Authorization for Web Services Christian Skalka X. Sean Wang The University of Vermont Trust but Verify (TbV) Reliable, practical authorization for web service invocation. Securing complex