1 / 12

Transition from Propositional Calculus

Transition from Propositional Calculus. We used Propositional Calculus to study and manipulate propositions where each proposition was viewed as an entire entity . (we cheated a bit with “V-Q-E” substitution within a post condition in correctness proof)

teddy
Download Presentation

Transition from Propositional Calculus

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. Transition from Propositional Calculus • We used Propositional Calculus to study and manipulate propositions where each proposition was viewed as an entire entity. (we cheated a bit with “V-Q-E” substitution within a post condition in correctness proof) • Working with the internal parts of a proposition was not possible; although propositions may be“combined with operators,” internal composition and structure of the proposition was not considered. • The notion of quantification (collection of things) was not included • e. g. ( try getting P3 from P1 /\ P2 by replacement rule or truth table) • P1: Every dog has a tail • P2: Spot is dog • P3: Spot has a tail

  2. Example of “Spot” P1 : Every dog has a tail P2 : Spot is a dog P3 : Spot has a tail What does forward chaining or backward chaining tell us? Is the compound proposition, (P1 /\ P2) -> P3, a tautology? Note this Not a tautology! A tautology, but of course! P1 P2 P3 P1/\P2 P1/\P2 -> P3 (P1/\P2) /\ (P1/\P2 -> P3) (P1/\P2) /\ (P1/\P2 -> P3) -> P3 T good T T T T T T Not good T T T F T F F T F T F T F T T F F F T F T F T T F T F T F T F F T T F F T F F T F T F F F F T F T

  3. Example of “Spot” • But we “know” we can “reason” that Spot has a tail! • Predicate Calculus allows us to “reason” through this example as follows: • (1) every animal that has the property of dog has the property tail • (2) Spot is an animal that has the property dog • going back to the statement (1) above we will get • Spot has the property of dog and thus has the property tail • In this set of reasoning we used several of the capabilities from predicate calculus, which will be discussed later

  4. Could Propositional Calculus Deal with “Spot?” • Consider the following propositions about a small domain of specific dogs: • P1 : Arf has a tail • P2 : Ace has a tail • P3 : JoJo has a tail • P4 : Spot has a tail • P5 : Bounce has a tail • Then we can show that P1/\P2/\P3/\P4/\P5 -> P4 • Making a statement about every element in the domain of dogs does allow us to conclude whether “Spot has a tail.” But we can not do this when the number of elements in the domain of dogs is “very large” or “infinite.” (Inconvenience in the case of very large; not possible in the case of infinite.) • We definitely need some way to deal with this infinite domain situation.

  5. Another Example of Problem • Consider the following : • If (Fred lives in Marietta) then (it is not the case that Fred lives in Athens). • Fred lives in Marietta • Then it is not the case that Fred lives in Athens • This is all “logical” and looks as follows : • P1 -> P2 • P1 • therefore P2 or P1 -> P2, P1 => P2 (modus ponens) (Not a problem ------- but see the next slide ---)

  6. Continuation of “Problem” example • Replace Fred with “someone” in the previous example: • If (someone lives in Marietta) then (it is not the case that someone lives in Athens). • someone lives in Marietta • It is not the case that someone lives in Athens • This line of reasoning is perfectly fine when using Propositional Calculus, but something doesn’t sound right because we know that there is “someone” that lives in Athens ! Replacing a constant, Fred, with a variablesomeone seems to create this anomaly. • What about the following ?: • If someone lives in Marietta then it is not the case that that same someone lives in Athens • Someone lives in Marietta • It is not the case that that same someone lives in Athens. • Note that when we cross referenced with “that same”, then the logical reasoning seemed to make sense. • Propositional Calculus does not handle the “internals” of a proposition; it only relates the propositional values at the “external” level!

  7. Predicate Calculus • From the previous examples of Propositional Calculus’s limitation inhandling the internals of propositionsand potentially infinite domain, a more powerful logical system, called Predicate Calculus is introduced. • Along with the notion of “variable” and “constant,” it has two major characteristics: • Predicate • Quantification

  8. Introduction to Predicate • Consider a proposition “generalized” to an expression which can be evaluated to be either true or false • An expression that contains 1) variables, 2)constants, 3)relational operators, and 4)arithmetic operators ( in some domain) • e.g.Length-of-logon-id < 9 (assumed domain is integers ) where Length-of-logon-id is a variable, < is the relational operator, 9 is an integer constant. • Can this expression be evaluated for its T or F value? what’s needed? ask class ?

  9. Predicates • A proposition can be written to include a “relationshipconstruct” called predicate. • PRED (x1, x2, - - - , xn) where x1, - - - xn is the argument list and PRED is the predicate. • A predicate with n-arguments is called n-place predicate. • e.g. 2-place predicate: • Less_than (5, 8) • Mother_of (Sandy, Tom) • *** Note that the order of the arguments is extremely important here ! • e.g. 1-place predicate (has a property) • is-_21(Sam) • Is_running (MS Word) • Note that these predicates in the above examples can all be evaluated for its Truth/False value. ( because ?)

  10. Constants and Variables - If all the arguments of a predicate are individual constants, then the resulting expression or formula must be either True or False. e.g, mother_of(person1, person2) has variables as arguments, but when replaced with mother-of(Jane, Joseph) then we can determine if the specific predicate is True or False. - With “Finite Universe” of discourse, we can represent the truth value of an n-place predicate with an n-dimensional array. e.g. with a 2-place predicate we can use a 2-dimensional array (or a table) to show the truth value of the finite universe. “mother_of” Jane Joseph Carol Sally assume that the total list of constants in the discourse is composed of: Jane, Joseph, Carol, and Sally Jane F T F T Joseph F F F F Carol T F F F Sally F F F F

  11. Complex Expression (Formula) • Just as in propositional calculus where we combined propositions with operators, we can do the same with predicates • This concept of composition may be captured by the notion of a formula : • An atomic formula is a predicate name followed by an argument list. • e.g. Calls(module_x, module_z) • A complex formula is a combination of atomic formulae created with connectors such as ~, \/. /\, ->, <-> (introduced in the propositional calculus section). We will later introduce some more connectors (e.g. existential operators). • e.g. Calls(module_x, module_y) /\ Calls(module_x, module_w)

  12. Examples of Predicate Expressions or Formulae • A transaction is invalid if its amount is less than $0. ( trans_amt < $0 ) -> ( is_invalid(trans) ) or $_amt_of(trans_amt, trans) /\ trans_amt < $0 -> state_is (trans, “invalid”) • There will never be more than 7 active on-line nodes on the system on_line_nodes < 8 or is_number_active_on( on_line_nodes, system) /\ on_line_nodes < 8

More Related