1 / 25

The Exciting World of Natural Deduction!!!

The Exciting World of Natural Deduction!!!. By: Dylan Kane Jordan Bradshaw Virginia Walker. Natural Deduction. Gerhard Gentzen Stanislaw Jaskowski 1934 Mimics the natural reasoning process, inference rules natural to humans

kuame-ochoa
Download Presentation

The Exciting World of Natural Deduction!!!

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. The Exciting World of Natural Deduction!!! By: Dylan Kane Jordan Bradshaw Virginia Walker

  2. Natural Deduction • Gerhard Gentzen • Stanislaw Jaskowski • 1934 • Mimics the natural reasoning process, inference rules natural to humans • Called “natural” because does not require conversion to (unreadable) normal form

  3. Background:Natural deduction proofs I’ll be back.

  4. Natural Deduction • Proof system for first-order logic • Designed to mimic the natural reasoning process • Process: • Make assumptions (“A” is true) • Letters like “A” can represent larger propositional phrases • The set of assumptions being relied on at a given step is called the context. • Use rules to draw conclusions. • Discharge assumptions as they become no longer necessary.

  5. Natural Deduction • Natural deduction is done in step by step: • Rule • Premises • Conclusion • …

  6. Logical Connectives

  7. Truth Tables for Logical Connectives

  8. Making Conclusions • The rules used to draw conclusions consist mostly of the introduction (I) and elimination (E) of these connectives. • Several of the rules serve to discharge earlier assumptions. • The result does not rely on the assumption being true. • If the assumption is used by itself again somewhere else, it must be discharged again in a step that follows.

  9. Introduction and Elimination • Introduction builds the conclusion out of the logical connective and the premises. • Elimination eliminates the logical connective from a premise.

  10. Rules: AND/OR Rule “or E” discharges S and T.

  11. Rules: IF Rule “if I” discharges S

  12. Rules: C • Proof by contradiction • If by assuming S is false, you reach a contradiction, S is true. • Discharges (not S)

  13. Rules: forall (∀) • Rule “∀I” requires that “a” does not occur in S(x) or any premise on which S(a) may depend.

  14. Rules: exists (∃) • Rule “∃E” requires that “a” does not occur in S(x) or T or any assumption other than S(a) on which the derivation of T from S(a) depends. • Rule “∃E” also discharges S(a).

  15. Tautology • Always true. • The proof of a tautology ultimately relies on no assumptions. • The assumptions are discharged throughout the proof.

  16. Sample proof: a tautology

  17. Sample proof: a tautology A is discharged using the ->I rule.

  18. Sample proof: a tautology B is discharged using the ->I rule.

  19. Example using Quantifiers • “Imagine how you would convince someone else, who didn’t know any formal logic, of the validity of the entailment you are trying to demonstrate.” • a.k.a. That a knowledge base entails a sentence.

  20. Example using Quantifiers • Ex. We want to prove this: • {forall x (F(x) -> G(x)) • forall x (G(x) -> H(x))} |- forall x (F(x) -> H(x)) Take an arbitrary object a Suppose a is an F Since all Fs are Gs, a is a G Since all Gs are Hs, a is an H So if a is an F then a is an H But this argument works for any a So all Fs are Hs

  21. Proof using Natural Deduction

  22. Rule exists (∃): Revisited • Rule “∃E” requires that “a” does not occur in S(x) or T or any assumption other than S(a) on which the derivation of T from S(a) depends. • Rule “∃E” also discharges S(a).

  23. Incorrect Proof (exists E)

  24. Interesting Tidbits for Further Reading • Natural Deduction book written in 1965 by Prawitz • Gallier in 1986 used Gentzen’s approach to expound the theoretical underpinning so f automated deduction.

  25. Credits • Reeves, Steve and Mike Clarke. Logic for Computer Science. 2003. • Russell, Stuart and Peter Norvig. Artificial Intelligence: A modern Approach. 2nd edition. 2003

More Related