Limitations of Propositional Logic => Predicate Calculus. Natural Language and Dialogue Systems Lab
|
|
|
- Roland Lawrence
- 10 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Limitations of Propositional Logic => Predicate Calculus Natural Language and Dialogue Systems Lab
2 Announcements New homeworks related to the projects posted Update your project proposals, due Friday Midterm Feb 23 rd Pop Quiz key discussion, return proposals and pop quizzes after class.
3 Key: Pop Quiz List the time(s) your team has arranged to meet every week. Specific TIMES set aside to meet each week. Specific RESPONSIBILITIES for each team member Name the modules that a dialogue system must typically have NLU, DM, Database, NLG (some people actually didn t know this) Describe in one sentence the input and the output for each of these modules NLU: words => semantic representation (e.g. dialogue act + arguments) DM: semantic representation to database query, database tuples to specification of dialogue response to give to NLG Database: database query => database tuples NLG: semantic representation (content plan) => output string
4 Key: Pop Quiz (continued) Describe in up to 10 sentences why you were asked to produce a corpus of utterances for your bot, how you did that, and what you will use it for. We are trying to make it possible to test each module separately by constructing sets of inputs/outputs for each module The NLU was the first module, we were supposed to construct strings for inputs and specify the semantic representation for outputs We decided to use domain specific dialogue act tagging and chunking as our techniques for producing the semantic output Given our corpus of NLU translated outputs, we will start testing our dialogue manager. Give a list of three things that might count as features/ capabilities that would make your system count as intelligent List one or more good performance metrics that your team intends to use to evaluate your BOT as a whole, and say WHY.
5 Key: Pop Quiz (continued) Give a list of three things that might count as features/capabilities that would make your system count as intelligent Our system is going to be able to resolve pronouns (he, she, it) and ellipsis (how about with Julia Roberts) Our system will make inferences using an ontology so it can generalize from the question that was asked. Our system will use Wordnet in the NLG component so it can do interesting word selection depending on how smart it thinks the user is, or how old. Our WOW system is going to use intelligent path planning, and rank routes we suggest to the user by how safe they are or how likely they are to succeed. Our system is going to develop a user model to use to rank outputs from the DB and modify this model based on the history of interaction with a particular user. Our system is going to have two modules for NLU, one is going to be rule-based and the other one will be trained from corpora. We hope to be able to show that unless you have good training methods and enough data the trained version can t outperform the rule-based one, but they make errors on different inputs. Therefore we hypothesize an interesting thing to try might be to use them together by voting
6 Key: Pop Quiz (continued) Give a list of three things that might count as features/capabilities that would make your system count as intelligent We are going to design our dialogue manager to be trainable using reinforcement learning. We will produce a very simple user simulation to debug the training method. Then we plan to use ourselves as subjects with user satisfaction as the feedback metric to show that we can train the system to improve its performance over time. Our system is going to respond to indirect speech acts, e.g. I wonder who won an Oscar in Our system is going to keep track of recipes you liked or didn t like. Our system is going to keep track of what you ve told it you have in the liquor cabinet or cupboard. Our system is going to have personality and modify the way it expresses itself for different users. We are going to do this with simple indexing on different ways to say things and by asking the user about their personality. But we hope to be able to show that users like the system better if it matches their personality. Or at least that users like some personalities better than others.
7 Key: Pop Quiz (continued) List one or more good performance metrics that your team intends to use to evaluate your BOT as a whole, and say WHY. This is the P of the PEAS model for dialogue agents These were covered in the lecture of Jan 26 th. Task Success Ask user were you successful Measure matching attributes for fixed tasks Ask user to rank different paths returned for WOW and see whether user ranking matches your ranking User Satisfaction (from a survey) Concept Accuracy (for NLU) Dialogue Act classification accuracy (for NLU) Does user like the Pirate personality of NLG or prefers a more boring personality for the agent?
8 System (Extrinsic) vs. Component (Intrinsic) Evaluation (1/25) PEAS Performance: performance on the target task (also called system, black-box, extrinsic evaluation) What is responsible for the overall performance? => Research/Science on individual modules: How accurate is your NLU? Does your NLG convey emotion or personality? Plug & Play: define module interfaces such that you can switch simpler versions of modules for intelligent ones Ablation Study: Knock out particular functionality to show difference in performance w/out it.
9 First Order Logic <=> Predicate Calculus Natural Language and Dialogue Systems Lab
10 NLTK Inference and Prover interfaces NLTK-inference.html nltk.inference.api-module.html
11 Index of /python Name Last modified Size Description Parent Directory - agents.html 18-Jul :36 32K agents.py 12-Nov :06 20K csp.html 18-Jul :36 28K csp.py 09-Dec :55 19K csp.txt 11-Nov : doctests.html 18-Jul :36 3.9K doctests.py 03-Feb :45 1.4K doctests.txt 11-Nov : games.html 18-Jul :36 16K games.py 12-Nov :06 9.8K guidelines.html 18-Jul :36 9.9K learning.html 18-Jul :36 35K learning.py 18-Nov :07 23K logic.html 18-Jul :36 48K logic.py 09-Dec :07 32K logic.txt 11-Nov :27 1.5K mdp.html 18-Jul :36 8.9K mdp.py 09-Dec :17 5.7K mdp.txt 09-Dec :54 1.0K nlp.html 18-Jul :36 11K nlp.py 05-Nov :56 5.9K nlp.txt 12-Nov :22 1.6K planning.html 18-Jul :36 2.0K planning.py 31-Oct : probability.html 18-Jul :36 9.3K probability.py 06-Nov :41 5.3K probability.txt 12-Nov : NATURAL py2html.html LANGUAGE AND DIALOGUE 18-Jul-2005 SYSTEMS LAB 17:36 9.9K py2html.py 12-Nov :08 4.2K readme.html 18-Jul :36 8.2K
12 AIMA Python file: logic.py: Representations and Inference for Logic (Chapters 7-10) Four important data types: KB: Abstract class holds a knowledge base of logical expressions KB_Agent: Abstract class subclasses agents.agent Expr: A logical expression Substitution: Implemented as a dictionary of var:value pairs, {x:1, y:x} Functions for doing logical inference: pl_true: Evaluate a propositional logical sentence in a model tt_entail:s Say if a statement is entailed by a KB pl_resolution: Do resolution on propositional sentences dpll_satisfiable: See if a propositional sentence is satisfiable to_cnf: Convert to conjunctive normal form Unify: Do unification of two FOL sentences diff, simp: Symbolic differentiation and simplification
13 Predicate Calculus Propositional Logic doesn t allow you to access the components of an assertion: it rained on Tuesday But not weather(tuesday,rain) or for all X such that X is a day of the week - weather(x,rain)
14 Predicate Calculus definitions Symbols true, false Constant Symbols which name objects or properties in the world, e.g. AI course, tree, tall, blue Variable Symbols designate general classes of objects, properties in the world Function Symbols map functions to constant: e.g. father(x) maps each person to their unique father Predicate Symbols likes(john,cheese) returns T, F Relations friendof(x) returns set of friends.
15 Predicate Calculus Operators The connectives: AND, OR, NOT, IMPLIES, EQUALS (same as propositional logic) Quantifiers Universal quantifier: for_all, Existential quantifier: there_exists, Universal Quantifier Sentence true for all values of the variable for_all X likes(x,icecream) Existential Quantifier Sentence is true for AT LEAST one value in the domain there_exists Y friends(y,peter)
16 Some examples If it doesn t rain on Monday, Tom will go to the mountains NOT weather(rain,monday) IMPLIES go(tom,mountains) Emma is a doberman pinscher and a good dog good_dog(emma) AND is_a(emma,doberman)
17 Some examples NOT there_exists X (person(x) AND likes(x,war)) Nobody likes war. there_exists X (trash(x) AND empty(right_hand) IMPLIES pick_up(x,right_hand)) If you see trash, and your hand is empty, pick it up.
18 First Order Predicate Calculus The basis of almost all knowledge representation and reasoning in every area of symbolic AI Natural Language Processing Planning, Reasoning Rule Induction in Machine Learning Expert Systems
19 First-order logic Whereas propositional logic assumes the world contains facts, first-order logic (like natural language) assumes the world contains Objects: people, houses, numbers, colors, baseball games, wars, Relations: red, round, prime, brother of, bigger than, part of, comes between, Functions: father of, best friend, one more than, plus,
20 Syntax of FOL: Basic elements Constants King_John, 2, UCSC,... Predicates Brother, >,... Functions Sqrt, Left_Leg_Of,... Variables x, y, a, b,... Connectives,,,, Equality = Quantifiers,
21 Atomic sentences Atomic sentence = predicate (term 1,...,term n ) or term 1 = term 2 Term = function (term 1,...,term n ) or constant or variable Brother(KingJohn,RichardTheLionheart) Length(LeftLegOf(Richard)) Length(LeftLegOf(KingJohn))
22 Complex sentences Complex sentences are made from atomic sentences using connectives S, S 1 S 2, S 1 S 2, S 1 S 2, S 1 S 2, E.g. Sibling(KingJohn,Richard) Sibling(Richard,KingJohn) >(1,2) (1,2) >(1,2) >(1,2)
23 Using FOL The kinship domain: Brothers are siblings x,y Brother(x,y) Sibling(x,y) One's mother is one's female parent m,c Mother(c) = m (Female(m) Parent(m,c)) Sibling is symmetric x,y Sibling(x,y) Sibling(y,x)
24 Knowledge and Syntactic Structures (The RTE shared task: see NLPP chap 10) The departure of Mr. Whitelaw from N. Ireland at this time has amazed Irish political leaders. While there was no official comment in Dublin, it would appear that the Government was not informed in advance of MR. WHITELAW S MOVE. Departure(X, fromplace, toplace) => Move(X, toplace)
25 What is required of a knowledge representation language? Representational adequacy: It should allow you to represent all the knowledge you need to reason with. Inferential adequacy: It should allow new knowledge to be inferred from a basic set of facts.
26 Truth in first-order logic Sentences are true with respect to a model and an interpretation Model contains objects (domain elements) and relations among them Interpretation specifies referents for constant symbols objects predicate symbols relations function symbols functional relations An atomic sentence predicate(term 1,...,term n ) is true iff the objects referred to by term 1,...,term n are in the relation referred to by predicate
27 Models for FOL: Example
28 Universal quantification <variables> <sentence> Everyone at UCSC is smart: x At(x, UCSC) Smart(x) x P is true in a model m iff P is true with x being each possible object in the model Roughly speaking, equivalent to the conjunction of instantiations of P At(KingJohn,UCSC) Smart(KingJohn) At(Richard,UCSC) Smart(Richard) At(UCSC,UCSC) Smart(UCSC)...
29 A common mistake to avoid Typically, is the main connective with Common mistake: using as the main connective with : x At(x, UCSC) Smart(x) means Everyone is at UCSC and everyone is smart
30 Existential quantification <variables> <sentence> Someone at UCSC is smart: x At(x,UCSC) Smart(x) x P is true in a model m iff P is true with x being some possible object in the model Roughly speaking, equivalent to the disjunction of instantiations of P At(KingJohn,UCSC) Smart(KingJohn) At(Richard,UCSC) Smart(Richard) At(UCSC,UCSC) Smart(UCSC)...
31 Another common mistake to avoid Typically, is the main connective with Common mistake: using as the main connective with : x At(x,UCSC) Smart(x) is true if there is anyone who is not at UCSC!
32 Properties of quantifiers x y is the same as y x x y is the same as y x x y is not the same as y x x y Loves(x,y) There is a person who loves everyone in the world y x Loves(x,y) Everyone in the world is loved by at least one person Quantifier duality: each can be expressed using the other x Likes(x,IceCream) x Likes(x,IceCream) x Likes(x,Broccoli) x Likes(x,Broccoli)
33 Equality term 1 = term 2 is true under a given interpretation if and only if term 1 and term 2 refer to the same object E.g., definition of Sibling in terms of Parent: x,y Sibling(x,y) [ (x = y) m,f (m = f) Parent(m,x) Parent(f,x) Parent(m,y) Parent(f,y)]
34 Using FOL The kinship domain: Brothers are siblings x,y Brother(x,y) Sibling(x,y) One's mother is one's female parent m,c Mother(c) = m (Female(m) Parent(m,c)) Sibling is symmetric x,y Sibling(x,y) Sibling(y,x)
35 Interacting with FOL KBs Suppose a wumpus-world agent is using an FOL KB and perceives a smell and a breeze (but no glitter) at t=5: Tell(KB,Percept([Smell,Breeze,None],5)) Ask(KB, a BestAction(a,5)) I.e., does the KB entail some best action at t=5? Answer: Yes, {a/shoot} substitution (binding list) Given a sentence S and a substitution σ, Sσ denotes the result of plugging σ into S; e.g., S = Smarter(x,y) σ = {x/hillary,y/bill} Sσ = Smarter(Hillary,Bill) Ask(KB,S) returns some/all σ such that KB σ
36 Knowledge base for the wumpus world Perception t,s,b Percept([s,b,Glitter],t) Glitter(t) Reflex t Glitter(t) BestAction(Grab,t)
37 Deducing hidden properties x,y,a,b Adjacent([x,y],[a,b]) [a,b] {[x+1,y], [x-1,y],[x,y+1],[x,y-1]} Properties of squares: s,t At(Agent,s,t) Breeze(t) Breezy(s) Squares are breezy near a pit: Diagnostic rule---infer cause from effect s Breezy(s) [ r Adjacent(r,s) Pit(r) ] Causal rule---infer effect from cause r Pit(r) [ s Adjacent(r,s) Breezy(s)]
38 Knowledge engineering in FOL 1. Identify the task 2. Assemble the relevant knowledge 3. Decide on a vocabulary of predicates, functions, and constants 4. Encode general knowledge about the domain 5. Encode a description of the specific problem instance 6. Pose queries to the inference procedure and get answers 7. Debug the knowledge base
39 Summary First-order logic: objects and relations are semantic primitives syntax: constants, functions, predicates, equality, quantifiers Increased expressive power: sufficient to define wumpus world
40 Ontological Commitment of Logics Ontological commitment what entities, relationships, and facts exist in world and can be reasoned about Epistemic commitment what agents can know about the world
41 Database Semantics Unique Names Assumption: Every constant refers to a distinct object Closed World Assumption Atomic Sentences not known to be true are false Domain Closure: There are no domain elements other than those named by the constant symbols.
42 Logic programming: Prolog Algorithm = Logic + Control Basis: backward chaining with Horn clauses + bells & whistles Widely used in Europe, Japan (basis of 5th Generation project) Compilation techniques 60 million LIPS Program = set of clauses = head :- literal 1, literal n. criminal(x) :- american(x), weapon(y), sells(x,y,z), hostile(z). Depth-first, left-to-right backward chaining Built-in predicates for arithmetic etc., e.g., X is Y*Z+3 Built-in predicates that have side effects (e.g., input and output predicates, assert/retract predicates) Closed-world assumption ("negation as failure") e.g., given alive(x) :- not dead(x). alive(joe) succeeds if dead(joe) fails
43 Inference in first-order logic Natural Language and Dialogue Systems Lab Chapter 9
44 Outline Reducing first-order inference to propositional inference Unification Generalized Modus Ponens Forward chaining Backward chaining Resolution
45 Universal instantiation (UI) Every instantiation of a universally quantified sentence is entailed by it: v α Subst({v/g}, α) for any variable v and ground term g E.g., x King(x) Greedy(x) Evil(x) yields: King(John) Greedy(John) Evil(John) King(Richard) Greedy(Richard) Evil(Richard) King(Father(John)) Greedy(Father(John)) Evil(Father(John))...
46 Existential instantiation (EI) For any sentence α, variable v, and constant symbol k that does not appear elsewhere in the knowledge base: v α Subst({v/k}, α) E.g., x Crown(x) OnHead(x,John) yields: Crown(C 1 ) OnHead(C 1,John) provided C 1 is a new constant symbol, called a Skolem constant
47 Reduction to propositional inference Suppose the KB contains just the following: x King(x) Greedy(x) Evil(x) King(John) Greedy(John) Brother(Richard,John) Instantiating the universal sentence in all possible ways, we have: King(John) Greedy(John) Evil(John) King(Richard) Greedy(Richard) Evil(Richard) King(John) Greedy(John) Brother(Richard,John) The new KB is propositionalized: proposition symbols are King(John), Greedy(John), Evil(John), King(Richard), etc.
48 Reduction of FOL to PL. Every FOL KB can be propositionalized so as to preserve entailment (A ground sentence is entailed by new KB iff entailed by original KB) Idea: propositionalize KB and query, apply resolution, return result Problem: with function symbols, there are infinitely many ground terms, e.g., Father(Father(Father(John)))
49 Reduction contd. Theorem: Herbrand (1930). If a sentence α is entailed by an FOL KB, it is entailed by a finite subset of the propositionalized KB Idea: For n = 0 to do create a propositional KB by instantiating with depth-$n$ terms see if α is entailed by this KB Problem: works if α is entailed, loops if α is not entailed Theorem: Turing (1936), Church (1936) Entailment for FOL is semidecidable (algorithms exist that say yes to every entailed sentence, but no algorithm exists that also says no to every nonentailed sentence.)
50 The DPLL algorithm EVERY FOL KB can be converted to a PL KB Determine if an input propositional logic sentence (in CNF) is satisfiable. Improvements over truth table enumeration: 1. Early termination A clause is true if any literal is true. A sentence is false if any clause is false. 2. Pure symbol heuristic Pure symbol: always appears with the same "sign" in all clauses. e.g., In the three clauses (A B), ( B C), (C A), A and B are pure, C is impure. Make a pure symbol literal true. 3. Unit clause heuristic Unit clause: only one literal in the clause The only literal in a unit clause must be true.
51 Problems with propositionalization Propositionalization seems to generate lots of irrelevant sentences. E.g., from: x King(x) Greedy(x) Evil(x) King(John) y Greedy(y) Brother(Richard,John) it seems obvious that Evil(John), but propositionalization produces lots of facts such as Greedy(Richard) that are irrelevant With p k-ary predicates and n constants, there are p n k instantiations.
52 Unification (Used heavily in NLP) We can get the inference immediately if we can find a substitution θ such that King(x) and Greedy(x) match King(John) and Greedy(y) θ = {x/john,y/john} works Unify(α,β) = θ if αθ = βθ p q θ Knows(John,x) Knows(John,Jane) Knows(John,x) Knows(y,OJ) Knows(John,x) Knows(y,Mother(y)) Knows(John,x) Knows(x,OJ) Standardizing apart eliminates overlap of variables, e.g., Knows(z 17,OJ)
53 Unification We can get the inference immediately if we can find a substitution θ such that King(x) and Greedy(x) match King(John) and Greedy(y) θ = {x/john,y/john} works Unify(α,β) = θ if αθ = βθ p q θ Knows(John,x) Knows(John,Jane) {x/jane}} Knows(John,x) Knows(y,OJ) Knows(John,x) Knows(y,Mother(y)) Knows(John,x) Knows(x,OJ) Standardizing apart eliminates overlap of variables, e.g., Knows(z 17,OJ)
54 Unification We can get the inference immediately if we can find a substitution θ such that King(x) and Greedy(x) match King(John) and Greedy(y) θ = {x/john,y/john} works Unify(α,β) = θ if αθ = βθ p q θ Knows(John,x) Knows(John,Jane) {x/jane}} Knows(John,x) Knows(y,OJ) {x/oj,y/john}} Knows(John,x) Knows(y,Mother(y)) Knows(John,x) Knows(x,OJ) Standardizing apart eliminates overlap of variables, e.g., Knows(z 17,OJ)
55 Unification We can get the inference immediately if we can find a substitution θ such that King(x) and Greedy(x) match King(John) and Greedy(y) θ = {x/john,y/john} works Unify(α,β) = θ if αθ = βθ p q θ Knows(John,x) Knows(John,Jane) {x/jane}} Knows(John,x) Knows(y,OJ) {x/oj,y/john}} Knows(John,x) Knows(y,Mother(y)) {y/john,x/mother(john)}} Knows(John,x) Knows(x,OJ) Standardizing apart eliminates overlap of variables, e.g., Knows(z 17,OJ)
56 Unification We can get the inference immediately if we can find a substitution θ such that King(x) and Greedy(x) match King(John) and Greedy(y) θ = {x/john,y/john} works Unify(α,β) = θ if αθ = βθ p q θ Knows(John,x) Knows(John,Jane) {x/jane}} Knows(John,x) Knows(y,OJ) {x/oj,y/john}} Knows(John,x) Knows(y,Mother(y)) {y/john,x/mother(john)}} Knows(John,x) Knows(x,OJ) {fail} Standardizing apart eliminates overlap of variables, e.g., Knows(z 17,OJ)
57 Unification To unify Knows(John,x) and Knows(y,z), θ = {y/john, x/z } or θ = {y/john, x/john, z/john} The first unifier is more general than the second. There is a single most general unifier (MGU) that is unique up to renaming of variables. MGU = { y/john, x/z }
58 The unification algorithm
59 The unification algorithm
60 Automated Deduction [1]: Sequent Rules for FOL
61 Automated Deduction [2]:Example Proof Apply Sequent Rules to Generate New Assertions Modus Ponens And Introduction Universal Elimination
62 Generalized Modus Ponens (GMP)
63 Example Knowledge Base [1]: English Statement of KB and Query
64 Example Knowledge Base [2]: Rules and Facts
65 Forward Chaining in FOL [2]: Example Proof
66 Forward Chaining in FOL [3]: Properties
67 Forward Chaining in FOL [4]: Efficiency
68 Forward Chaining in FOL [1]: Algorithm
69 STOPPED HERE Natural Language and Dialogue Systems Lab
70 Backward Chaining in FOL [1]: Algorithm
71 Example Knowledge Base [2]: Rules and Facts
72 Backward Chaining in FOL [2]: Example Proof
73 Backward Chaining in FOL [3]: Properties
74 Resolution: Brief Summary
75 Conversion of FOL to Clausal Form (CNF) [1]
76 Conversion of FOL to Clausal Form (CNF) [2]
77 Resolution Mnemonic: INSEUDOR Implications Out (Replace with Disjunctive Clauses) Negations Inward (DeMorgan s Theorem) Standardize Variables Apart (Eliminate Duplicate Names) Existentials Out (Skolemize) Universals Made Implicit Distribute And Over Or (i.e., Disjunctions Inward) Operators Made Implicit (Convert to List of Lists of Literals) Rename Variables (Independent Clauses) A Memonic for Star Trek: The Next Generation Fans Captain Picard: I ll Notify Spock s Eminent Underground Dissidents On Romulus I ll Notify Sarek s Eminent Underground Descendant On Romulus
78 Resolution Proof: Definite Clauses ~ Enemy(Nono, America)
79 Terminology Generalized Modus Ponens (GMP) Sound and complete rule for first-order inference (reasoning in FOL) Requires pattern matching by unification Unification: Algorithm for Matching Patterns Used in type inference, first-order inference Matches well-formed formulas (WFFs), atoms, terms Terms: variables, constants, functions and arguments Arguments: nested terms Resolution: Sound and Complete Inference Rule/Procedure for FOL Antecedent (aka precedent): sentences above line in sequent rule Resolvent (aka consequent): sentences below line in sequent rule Forward Chaining: Systematic Application of Rule to Whole KB Rete algorithm in production systems for expert systems development Susceptible to high fan-out (branch factor) Backward Chaining: Goal-Directed
80 Ontologies & Knowledge Representation Natural Language and Dialogue Systems Lab
81 What Is an Ontology, Anyway? Wilson, T. V. (2006). How Semantic Web Works Wikipedia.
82 Ontologies usually are Description Logics e.g. Wordnet, Framenet, YAGO, Freebase A family of logic-based Knowledge Representation Formalisms Descendents of semantic networks and KL-ONE Describe domain in terms of concepts (classes), Roles (properties, relationships) and individuals Distinguished by Formal Semantics (typically model theoretic) Decidable fragments of FOL Provision of inference services, e.g. Decision procedures for key problems (satisfiability, subsumption) Implemented Systems (highly optimized)
83 Description Logics Basics Concepts (formulae) e.g. person, doctor, happyparent, Roles e.g. haschild, loves Individuals (nominals): John, Mary, Italy Operators (for forming concepts and roles) restricted so that Satisfiabilty is decidable and if possible of low complexity No need for explicit use of variables, ie restrictions on existential and universal quantification
84 What Is A Concept? Concept and Class are used synonymously A class is a concept in the domain a class of wines a class of wineries a class of red wines A class is a collection of elements with similar properties Instances of classes a glass of California wine you ll have for lunch
85 Class Inheritance Classes usually constitute a taxonomic hierarchy (a subclass-superclass hierarchy) A class hierarchy is usually an IS-A hierarchy: an instance of a subclass is instance of a superclass If you think of a class as a set of elements, a subclass is a subset an
86 Class Inheritance Example Apple is a subclass of Fruit Every apple is a fruit Red wine is a subclass of Wine Every red wine is a wine Chianti wine is a subclass of Red wine Every Chianti wine is a red wine
87 Levels In The Hierarchy Top level Middle level Bottom level
88 Slots, Attributes, and Relations: synonymous Slots in class definition C Defining Properties of Classes: Slots Describe attributes of instances of C Describe relationships to other instances e.g., each wine will have color, sugar content, producer, etc. Slots for the Concept/Class Wine
89 Concept Attributes: Properties & Slots Types of properties intrinsic properties: flavor and color of wine extrinsic properties: name and price of wine parts: ingredients in a dish relations to other objects: producer of wine (winery) Simple and complex properties simple properties (attributes): contain primitive values (strings, numbers) complex properties: contain (or point to) other objects (e.g., a winery instance)
90 Slot and Class Inheritance A subclass inherits all the slots from the superclass If a wine has a name and flavor, a red wine also has a name and flavor If a class has multiple superclasses, it inherits slots from all of them Port is both a dessert wine and a red wine. It inherits sugar content: high from the former and color:red from the latter
91 Property constraints (facets) describe or limit the set of possible values for a slot The name of a wine is a string Property Constraints The wine producer is an instance of Winery A winery has exactly one location Facets for slots in the Wine class
92 What is required of a knowledge representation? Representational adequacy: It should allow you to represent all the knowledge you need to reason with. Inferential adequacy: It should allow new knowledge to be inferred from a basic set of facts. Inferential efficiency: Inferences should be made efficiently Clear Syntax and Semantics: We should know what the allowable expressions of the language are and what they mean Naturalness: The language should be reasonably natural and easy to use
93 Building a knowledge base Knowledge engineering (Circa 1980 s) Investigate domain Create formal representation of objects Interview domain experts Knowledge Acquisition & Representation (TAKES YEARS) Now: Crowd Source It! Data Mine it! Both! demo.html
94 WordNet (already part of NLTK) 70,000 synsets (synonym sets) Simple, noun hierarchy Widely used in language processing: Query expansion, IR, Translation Online version
95 WordNet Example
96 WordNet Resources greenhouse as noun (X) Synonyms, nursery Hypernyms (designating whole class, X IS_A), e.g., building Hyponyms (designating subclass, Y IS_KIND_OF), e.g., orangery, conservatory Meronyms (constituent parts or substance, X HAS_PART), e.g., door, wall Polysemy count (number of senses of word in a syntactic category)
97
98 Add to it! (Snow, Jurafsky et al)
99 By Ben Samuel Inspired by the paper by Fabian M. Suchanek, Gjergji Kasneci, and Gerhard Weikum
100 YAGO = Yet Another Great Ontology. Great! What does Ontology mean? In this case, it means a collection of Facts Such as Elvis Birthday What London is called in French And many more! Sounds Like Fun! But is it useful?
101 Ontologies are used all over the place, helping to fuel a variety of helpful tools. Word Sense Disambiguation Kinda like Scribblenauts! Question Answering and information retrieval Wine and Nutrition Chatbots we read about. Machine Translation Francais to French! Document Classification Categorize Electronic Documents! Thank you Ontologies!
102 Lots of existing ontologies get their facts from a single source Frequently domain dependent Limiting! Not as high quality or well structured as multiple sources would be. YAGO takes information from both Wikipedia and WordNet Wikipedia provides vast amounts of data on actual people WordNet provides a Taxonomy, which enables internal classification of said data.
103
104
105 So, just how are facts represented inside of YAGO? Every object (Elvis, Einstein, 1984, France, Pizza) is known as an Entity Two Entities can stand in a Relation to each other. For example: ElvisPresley HasWonPrize Grammy Award singer SubClassOf person Elvis means Elvis Presley
106 YAGO also gives each fact a unique identifier. If (ElvisPresley, HasWonPrize, Grammy Award) has fact identifier #1 then (#1, FoundIn, Wikipedia) means that the fact was found in Wikipedia. Becomes very important for representing n-ary relations. For example: #2: #1 InYear 1967 Would Mean: Fact number 2 in the ontology is that Elvis Presley Has won a Grammy Award in 1967
107 Of course, with all of these great facts living in YAGO, we need a way to get them out! Good thing we have a Query Language So, to find out what year Elvis won the Grammy, for example?i1: Elvis HasWonPrize Grammy Award?i2:?i1 InYear?x The year 1967 should get bound to?x
108 Wikipedia: Focuses on InfoBoxes Structured Data is easier to gather, doesn t have to deal with natural language understanding. Still needs to take context of page into account though, by looking at type of infobox. The length of a car is different than the length of a song, for example. (Car infobox vs. song infobox) WordNet: Looks at Synsets Each Synset becomes a class in YAGO (e.g. person)
109 Connects the two by using the hyponyms/ hypernyms of WordNet Hyponym: X is a type of Y. Hypernym: A type of X is Y. A class is a subset of another if the first is a hyponym of the second. singer SubClassOf person Algorithmically connect low Wikipedia classes (American people in Japan) to high WordNet classes (Person)
110 YAGO was tested by giving human judges randomly selected facts, and asking them if YAGO had it right Were provided with Wikipedia Context Evaluation had terrific results of around 95% accuracy! The crucial link between WordNet and Wikipedia turned out to be very accurate! Some errors were more philosophical in nature (What does it mean to be a French Economist)
111 YAGO is very large, and growing all the time! 1.7M Entities, 15M Facts in 2008 > 2M Entities, 20M Facts in May And people are using it! (either by borrowing entities, leveraging it s taxonomic information, or including YAGO all together!) Various research projects Semantic Search, Entity Organization, Information Extraction Various Ontology projects Freebase, UMBEL, Cyc, Dbpedia.
112 YAGO is an ontology which consists of many, many facts. It forms the facts by leveraging information from Wikipedia and WordNet. Has a query language to retrieve facts. Is used by many other projects, and seems to be growing rapidly itself. (online demo:
113
114 The DPLL algorithm EVERY FOL KB can be converted to a PL KB Determine if an input propositional logic sentence (in CNF) is satisfiable. Improvements over truth table enumeration: 1. Early termination A clause is true if any literal is true. A sentence is false if any clause is false. 2. Pure symbol heuristic Pure symbol: always appears with the same "sign" in all clauses. e.g., In the three clauses (A B), ( B C), (C A), A and B are pure, C is impure. Make a pure symbol literal true. 3. Unit clause heuristic Unit clause: only one literal in the clause The only literal in a unit clause must be true.
Inference in first-order logic
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
ONTOLOGIES A short tutorial with references to YAGO Cosmina CROITORU
ONTOLOGIES p. 1/40 ONTOLOGIES A short tutorial with references to YAGO Cosmina CROITORU Unlocking the Secrets of the Past: Text Mining for Historical Documents Blockseminar, 21.2.-11.3.2011 ONTOLOGIES
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
First-order logic. Chapter 8. Chapter 8 1
First-order logic Chapter 8 Chapter 8 1 Outline Why FOL? Syntax and semantics of FOL Fun with sentences Wumpus world in FOL Chapter 8 2 Pros and cons of propositional logic Propositional logic is declarative:
! " # The Logic of Descriptions. Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation. Terminology. Overview. Three Basic Features. Some History on DLs
,!0((,.+#$),%$(-&.& *,2(-$)%&2.'3&%!&, Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation Alessandro Agostini [email protected] University of Trento Fausto Giunchiglia [email protected] The Logic of Descriptions!$%&'()*$#)
Lecture 8: Resolution theorem-proving
Comp24412 Symbolic AI Lecture 8: Resolution theorem-proving Ian Pratt-Hartmann Room KB2.38: email: [email protected] 2014 15 In the previous Lecture, we met SATCHMO, a first-order theorem-prover implemented
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 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
Artificial Intelligence
Artificial Intelligence ICS461 Fall 2010 1 Lecture #12B More Representations Outline Logics Rules Frames Nancy E. Reed [email protected] 2 Representation Agents deal with knowledge (data) Facts (believe
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
Logical Agents. Explorations in Artificial Intelligence. Knowledge-based Agents. Knowledge-base Agents. Outline. Knowledge bases
Logical Agents Explorations in Artificial Intelligence rof. Carla. Gomes [email protected] Agents that are able to: Form representations of the world Use a process to derive new representations of the
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
Lecture 18 of 42. Lecture 18 of 42
Knowledge Representation Concluded: KE, CIKM, & Representing Events over Time Discussion: Structure Elicitation, Event Calculus William H. Hsu Department of Computing and Information Sciences, KSU KSOL
Course Outline Department of Computing Science Faculty of Science. COMP 3710-3 Applied Artificial Intelligence (3,1,0) Fall 2015
Course Outline Department of Computing Science Faculty of Science COMP 710 - Applied Artificial Intelligence (,1,0) Fall 2015 Instructor: Office: Phone/Voice Mail: E-Mail: Course Description : Students
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
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
Overview of the TACITUS Project
Overview of the TACITUS Project Jerry R. Hobbs Artificial Intelligence Center SRI International 1 Aims of the Project The specific aim of the TACITUS project is to develop interpretation processes for
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?
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
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
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
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
FUNDAMENTALS OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE KNOWLEDGE REPRESENTATION AND NETWORKED SCHEMES
Riga Technical University Faculty of Computer Science and Information Technology Department of Systems Theory and Design FUNDAMENTALS OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE Lecture 7 KNOWLEDGE REPRESENTATION AND NETWORKED
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
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
Sound and Complete Inference Rules in FOL
Sound and Complete Inference Rules in FOL An inference rule i is called sound if KB = α whenever KB i α An inference rule i is called complete if KB i α whenever KB = α Generalised Modus-Ponens (equivalently,
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
A Knowledge-based System for Translating FOL Formulas into NL Sentences
A Knowledge-based System for Translating FOL Formulas into NL Sentences Aikaterini Mpagouli, Ioannis Hatzilygeroudis University of Patras, School of Engineering Department of Computer Engineering & Informatics,
Cassandra. References:
Cassandra References: Becker, Moritz; Sewell, Peter. Cassandra: Flexible Trust Management, Applied to Electronic Health Records. 2004. Li, Ninghui; Mitchell, John. Datalog with Constraints: A Foundation
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
Schema Mappings and Data Exchange
Schema Mappings and Data Exchange Phokion G. Kolaitis University of California, Santa Cruz & IBM Research-Almaden EASSLC 2012 Southwest University August 2012 1 Logic and Databases Extensive interaction
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
Chapter 7: Functional Programming Languages
Chapter 7: Functional Programming Languages Aarne Ranta Slides for the book Implementing Programming Languages. An Introduction to Compilers and Interpreters, College Publications, 2012. Fun: a language
(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 (,,,,
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
IAI : Knowledge Representation
IAI : Knowledge Representation John A. Bullinaria, 2005 1. What is Knowledge? 2. What is a Knowledge Representation? 3. Requirements of a Knowledge Representation 4. Practical Aspects of Good Representations
each college c i C has a capacity q i - the maximum number of students it will admit
n colleges in a set C, m applicants in a set A, where m is much larger than n. each college c i C has a capacity q i - the maximum number of students it will admit each college c i has a strict order i
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
Optimizing Description Logic Subsumption
Topics in Knowledge Representation and Reasoning Optimizing Description Logic Subsumption Maryam Fazel-Zarandi Company Department of Computer Science University of Toronto Outline Introduction Optimization
SQL Database queries and their equivalence to predicate calculus
SQL Database queries and their equivalence to predicate calculus Russell Impagliazzo, with assistence from Cameron Helm November 3, 2013 1 Warning This lecture goes somewhat beyond Russell s expertise,
Paraphrasing controlled English texts
Paraphrasing controlled English texts Kaarel Kaljurand Institute of Computational Linguistics, University of Zurich [email protected] Abstract. We discuss paraphrasing controlled English texts, by defining
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
Building a Question Classifier for a TREC-Style Question Answering System
Building a Question Classifier for a TREC-Style Question Answering System Richard May & Ari Steinberg Topic: Question Classification We define Question Classification (QC) here to be the task that, given
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 [email protected] Abstract This paper presents a natural deduction system preserving falsity. This new
Formalization of the CRM: Initial Thoughts
Formalization of the CRM: Initial Thoughts Carlo Meghini Istituto di Scienza e Tecnologie della Informazione Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche Pisa CRM SIG Meeting Iraklio, October 1st, 2014 Outline Overture:
The Classes P and NP
The Classes P and NP We now shift gears slightly and restrict our attention to the examination of two families of problems which are very important to computer scientists. These families constitute the
15-780: Graduate AI Lecture 3. FOL proofs. Geoff Gordon (this lecture) Tuomas Sandholm TAs Erik Zawadzki, Abe Othman
15-780: Graduate AI Lecture 3. FOL proofs Geoff Gordon (this lecture) Tuomas Sandholm TAs Erik Zawadzki, Abe Othman Admin 2 HW1 Out today Due Tue, Feb. 1 (two weeks) hand in hardcopy at beginning of class
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)
Plan-Space Search. Searching for a Solution Plan in a Graph of Partial Plans
Plan-Space Search Searching for a Solution Plan in a Graph of Partial Plans Literature Malik Ghallab, Dana Nau, and Paolo Traverso. Automated Planning Theory and Practice, chapter 2 and 5. Elsevier/Morgan
Answers G53KRR 2009-10
s G53KRR 2009-10 1. (a) Express the following sentences in first-order logic, using unary predicates Fragile, Break, Fall, TennisBall. S1 Fragile things break if they fall S2 Tennis balls are not fragile
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
Chapter 7. Functions and onto. 7.1 Functions
Chapter 7 Functions and onto This chapter covers functions, including function composition and what it means for a function to be onto. In the process, we ll see what happens when two dissimilar quantifiers
[Refer Slide Time: 05:10]
Principles of Programming Languages Prof: S. Arun Kumar Department of Computer Science and Engineering Indian Institute of Technology Delhi Lecture no 7 Lecture Title: Syntactic Classes Welcome to lecture
2. SEMANTIC RELATIONS
2. SEMANTIC RELATIONS 2.0 Review: meaning, sense, reference A word has meaning by having both sense and reference. Sense: Word meaning: = concept Sentence meaning: = proposition (1) a. The man kissed the
Formal Engineering for Industrial Software Development
Shaoying Liu Formal Engineering for Industrial Software Development Using the SOFL Method With 90 Figures and 30 Tables Springer Contents Introduction 1 1.1 Software Life Cycle... 2 1.2 The Problem 4 1.3
Relations: their uses in programming and computational specifications
PEPS Relations, 15 December 2008 1/27 Relations: their uses in programming and computational specifications Dale Miller INRIA - Saclay & LIX, Ecole Polytechnique 1. Logic and computation Outline 2. Comparing
Chapter 15 Functional Programming Languages
Chapter 15 Functional Programming Languages Introduction - The design of the imperative languages is based directly on the von Neumann architecture Efficiency (at least at first) is the primary concern,
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
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,
How To Understand The Theory Of Computer Science
Theory of Computation Lecture Notes Abhijat Vichare August 2005 Contents 1 Introduction 2 What is Computation? 3 The λ Calculus 3.1 Conversions: 3.2 The calculus in use 3.3 Few Important Theorems 3.4 Worked
The Modal Logic Programming System MProlog
The Modal Logic Programming System MProlog Linh Anh Nguyen Institute of Informatics, University of Warsaw ul. Banacha 2, 02-097 Warsaw, Poland [email protected] Abstract. We present the design of our
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
060010706- Artificial Intelligence 2014
Module-1 Introduction Short Answer Questions: 1. Define the term Artificial Intelligence (AI). 2. List the two general approaches used by AI researchers. 3. State the basic objective of bottom-up approach
Boolean Algebra Part 1
Boolean Algebra Part 1 Page 1 Boolean Algebra Objectives Understand Basic Boolean Algebra Relate Boolean Algebra to Logic Networks Prove Laws using Truth Tables Understand and Use First Basic Theorems
INF5820 Natural Language Processing - NLP. H2009 Jan Tore Lønning [email protected]
INF5820 Natural Language Processing - NLP H2009 Jan Tore Lønning [email protected] Semantic Role Labeling INF5830 Lecture 13 Nov 4, 2009 Today Some words about semantics Thematic/semantic roles PropBank &
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
A Semantical Perspective on Verification of Knowledge
A Semantical Perspective on Verification of Knowledge Paul Leemans, Jan Treur, Mark Willems Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Artificial Intelligence De Boelelaan 1081a, 1081 HV Amsterdam The
Software Modeling and Verification
Software Modeling and Verification Alessandro Aldini DiSBeF - Sezione STI University of Urbino Carlo Bo Italy 3-4 February 2015 Algorithmic verification Correctness problem Is the software/hardware system
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
Formal Languages and Automata Theory - Regular Expressions and Finite Automata -
Formal Languages and Automata Theory - Regular Expressions and Finite Automata - Samarjit Chakraborty Computer Engineering and Networks Laboratory Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH) Zürich March
Deterministic Discrete Modeling
Deterministic Discrete Modeling Formal Semantics of Firewalls in Isabelle/HOL Cornelius Diekmann, M.Sc. Dr. Heiko Niedermayer Prof. Dr.-Ing. Georg Carle Lehrstuhl für Netzarchitekturen und Netzdienste
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
Natural Language Database Interface for the Community Based Monitoring System *
Natural Language Database Interface for the Community Based Monitoring System * Krissanne Kaye Garcia, Ma. Angelica Lumain, Jose Antonio Wong, Jhovee Gerard Yap, Charibeth Cheng De La Salle University
Bounded Treewidth in Knowledge Representation and Reasoning 1
Bounded Treewidth in Knowledge Representation and Reasoning 1 Reinhard Pichler Institut für Informationssysteme Arbeitsbereich DBAI Technische Universität Wien Luminy, October 2010 1 Joint work with G.
Module Catalogue for the Bachelor Program in Computational Linguistics at the University of Heidelberg
Module Catalogue for the Bachelor Program in Computational Linguistics at the University of Heidelberg March 1, 2007 The catalogue is organized into sections of (1) obligatory modules ( Basismodule ) that
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 [email protected] Jeff Van
The CLIPS environment. The CLIPS programming language. CLIPS production rules language - facts. Notes
The CLIPS environment The CLIPS environment CLIPS is an environment to develop knowledge based systems It defines a programming language that allows to represent declarative and procedural knowledge This
ML for the Working Programmer
ML for the Working Programmer 2nd edition Lawrence C. Paulson University of Cambridge CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS CONTENTS Preface to the Second Edition Preface xiii xv 1 Standard ML 1 Functional Programming
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
A Framework for Ontology-Based Knowledge Management System
A Framework for Ontology-Based Knowledge Management System Jiangning WU Institute of Systems Engineering, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian, 116024, China E-mail: [email protected] Abstract Knowledge
Attribution. Modified from Stuart Russell s slides (Berkeley) Parts of the slides are inspired by Dan Klein s lecture material for CS 188 (Berkeley)
Machine Learning 1 Attribution Modified from Stuart Russell s slides (Berkeley) Parts of the slides are inspired by Dan Klein s lecture material for CS 188 (Berkeley) 2 Outline Inductive learning Decision
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
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
Relational Databases
Relational Databases Jan Chomicki University at Buffalo Jan Chomicki () Relational databases 1 / 18 Relational data model Domain domain: predefined set of atomic values: integers, strings,... every attribute
Programming Languages in Artificial Intelligence
Programming Languages in Artificial Intelligence Günter Neumann, German Research Center for Artificial Intelligence (LT Lab, DFKI) I. AI programming languages II. Functional programming III. Functional
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
Software Verification and Testing. Lecture Notes: Temporal Logics
Software Verification and Testing Lecture Notes: Temporal Logics Motivation traditional programs (whether terminating or non-terminating) can be modelled as relations are analysed wrt their input/output
Static Program Transformations for Efficient Software Model Checking
Static Program Transformations for Efficient Software Model Checking Shobha Vasudevan Jacob Abraham The University of Texas at Austin Dependable Systems Large and complex systems Software faults are major
Enforcing Data Quality Rules for a Synchronized VM Log Audit Environment Using Transformation Mapping Techniques
Enforcing Data Quality Rules for a Synchronized VM Log Audit Environment Using Transformation Mapping Techniques Sean Thorpe 1, Indrajit Ray 2, and Tyrone Grandison 3 1 Faculty of Engineering and Computing,
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
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
Introducing Formal Methods. Software Engineering and Formal Methods
Introducing Formal Methods Formal Methods for Software Specification and Analysis: An Overview 1 Software Engineering and Formal Methods Every Software engineering methodology is based on a recommended
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
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
Query Processing in Data Integration Systems
Query Processing in Data Integration Systems Diego Calvanese Free University of Bozen-Bolzano BIT PhD Summer School Bressanone July 3 7, 2006 D. Calvanese Data Integration BIT PhD Summer School 1 / 152
A Review and Comparison of Rule Languages and Rule-based Inference Engines for the Semantic Web
A Review and Comparison of and -based Inference Engines for the Semantic Web Thanyalak Rattanasawad, Kanda Runapongsa Saikaew Department of Computer Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Khon Kaen University,
