Propositional Logic Propositional Logic Russell and Norvig Chapter 7
Propositional LogicPropositional Logic
Russell and NorvigChapter 7
Knowledge-Based AgentKnowledge-Based Agent
environmentagent
?
sensors
actuators
Knowledge base
A simple knowledge-based agent
The agent must be able to: Represent states, actions, etc. Incorporate new percepts Update internal representations of the world Deduce hidden properties of the world Deduce appropriate actions
Types of KnowledgeTypes of Knowledge
Procedural, e.g.: functions Such knowledge can only be used in one way -- by executing it
Declarative, e.g.: constraints It can be used to perform many different sorts of inferences
LogicLogic
Logic is a declarative language to:
Assert sentences representing facts that hold in a world W (these sentences are given the value true)
Deduce the true/false values to sentences representing other aspects of W
Wumpus World PEAS descriptionPerformance measure
gold +1000, death -1000 -1 per step, -10 for using the arrow
Environment Squares adjacent to wumpus are smelly Squares adjacent to pit are breezy Glitter iff gold is in the same square Shooting kills wumpus if you are facing it Shooting uses up the only arrow Grabbing picks up gold if in same square Releasing drops the gold in same square
Sensors: Stench, Breeze, Glitter, Bump, ScreamActuators: Left turn, Right turn, Forward, Grab, Release, Shoot
Wumpus world characterization
Fully Observable No – only local perceptionDeterministic Yes – outcomes exactly specifiedEpisodic No – sequential at the level of actionsStatic Yes – Wumpus and Pits do not moveDiscrete YesSingle-agent? Yes – Wumpus is essentially a natural feature
Exploring a wumpus world
Exploring a wumpus world
Exploring a wumpus world
Exploring a wumpus world
Exploring a wumpus world
Exploring a wumpus world
Exploring a wumpus world
Exploring a wumpus world
Logic in general
Logics are formal languages for representing information such that conclusions can be drawnSyntax defines the sentences in the languageSemantics define the "meaning" of sentences; i.e., define truth of a sentence in a
world
Connection World-Connection World-
RepresentationRepresentation
World W
Conceptualization
Facts about W
hold
hold
Sentences
represent
Facts about W
represent
Sentencesentail
Examples of LogicsExamples of Logics
Propositional calculus A B C First-order predicate calculus ( x)( y) Mother(y,x) Logic of Belief B(John,Father(Zeus,Cronus))
ModelModel
A model of a sentence is an assignment of a truth value – true or false – to every atomic sentence such that the sentence evaluates to true.
Model of a KBModel of a KB
Let KB be a set of sentences
A model m is a model of KB iff it is a model of all sentences in KB, that is, all sentences in KB are true in m.
Satisfiability of a KBSatisfiability of a KB
A KB is satisfiable iff it admits at least one model; otherwise it is unsatisfiable
KB1 = {P, QR} is satisfiable
KB2 = {PP} is satisfiable
KB3 = {P, P} is unsatisfiable
valid sentenceor tautology
Logical EntailmentLogical Entailment
KB : set of sentences : arbitrary sentence KB entails – written KB – iff every model of KB is also a model of Alternatively, KB iff {KB,} is unsatisfiable KB is valid
Inference RuleInference Rule
An inference rule {, } consists of 2 sentence patterns and called the conditions and one sentence pattern called the conclusion If and match two sentences of KB then the corresponding can be inferred according to the rule
InferenceInference
I: Set of inference rules KB: Set of sentences Inference is the process of applying successive inference rules from I to KB, each rule adding its conclusion to KB
Example: Modus PonensExample: Modus Ponens
From Battery-OK Bulbs-OK Headlights-Work Battery-OK Bulbs-OKInfer Headlights-Work
{ , }
{, }
Connective symbol (implication)
Logical entailment
Inference
KB iff KB is valid
SoundnessSoundness
An inference rule is sound if it generates only entailed sentences All inference rules previously given are sound, e.g.:modus ponens: { , } The following rule: { , } is unsound, which does not mean it is useless (an inference rule for abduction, outside scope of this course)
Is each of the following a sound inference rule?
{ , }
{ , }
CompletenessCompleteness
A set of inference rules is complete if every entailed sentences can be obtained by applying some finite succession of these rulesModus ponens alone is not complete, e.g.:from A B and B, we cannot get A
ProofProof
The proof of a sentence from a set of sentences KB is the derivation of by applying a series of sound inference rules
ProofProof
The proof of a sentence from a set of sentences KB is the derivation of by applying a series of sound inference rules
1. Battery-OK Bulbs-OK Headlights-Work2. Battery-OK Starter-OK Empty-Gas-Tank Engine-Starts3. Engine-Starts Flat-Tire Car-OK4. Headlights-Work5. Battery-OK6. Starter-OK 7. Empty-Gas-Tank 8. Car-OK 9. Battery-OK Starter-OK by 5,610. Battery-OK Starter-OK Empty-Gas-Tank by 9,711. Engine-Starts by 2,1012. Engine-Starts Flat-Tire by 3,813. Flat-Tire by 11,12
Inference ProblemInference Problem
Given: KB: a set of sentence : a sentence
Answer: KB ?
KB iff {KB,} is unsatisfiable
Deduction vs. Satisfiability Deduction vs. Satisfiability TestTest
Hence:• Deciding whether a set of
sentences entails another sentence, or not
• Testing whether a set of sentences is satisfiable, or not
are closely related problems
Complementary LiteralsComplementary Literals
A literal is a either an atomic sentence or the negated atomic sentence, e.g.: P, P
Two literals are complementary if one is the negation of the other, e.g.: P and P
Unit Resolution RuleUnit Resolution Rule
Given two sentences: L1 … Lp and M where Li,…, Lp and M are all literals, and M and Li are complementary literalsInfer: L1 … Li-1 Li+1 … Lp
ExamplesExamplesFrom:
Engine-Starts Car-OKEngine-Starts
Infer:Car-OK From:
Engine-Starts Car-OKCar-OK
Infer: Engine-Starts
Modus ponens
Modus tollens
Engine-Starts Car-OK
Shortcoming of Unit Shortcoming of Unit ResolutionResolution
From:
Engine-Starts Flat-Tire Car-OK
Engine-Starts Empty-Gas-Tank
we can infer nothing!
Full Resolution RuleFull Resolution Rule
Given two clauses: L1 … Lp and M1 … Mq where Li and Mj are complementrary
Infer the clause: L1 … Li-1Li+1…LkM1 … Mj-1Mj+1…Mk
ExampleExample
From:
Engine-Starts Flat-Tire Car-OK
Engine-Starts Empty-Gas-Tank
Infer:
Empty-Gas-Tank Flat-Tire Car-OK
ExampleExample
From:
P Q ( P Q)
Q R ( Q R)
Infer:
P R ( P R)
Not All Inferences are Not All Inferences are Useful! Useful!
From:
Engine-Starts Flat-Tire Car-OK
Engine-Starts Flat-Tire
Infer:
Flat-Tire Flat-Tire Car-OK
Not All Inferences are Not All Inferences are Useful!Useful!
From:
Engine-Starts Flat-Tire Car-OK
Engine-Starts Flat-Tire
Infer:
Flat-Tire Flat-Tire Car-OK
tautology
Not All Inferences are Not All Inferences are Useful!Useful!
From:
Engine-Starts Flat-Tire Car-OK
Engine-Starts Flat-Tire
Infer:
Flat-Tire Flat-Tire Car-OK True
tautology
ExampleExample1. Battery-OK Bulbs-OK Headlights-Work2. Battery-OK Starter-OK Empty-Gas-Tank Engine-Starts3. Engine-Starts Flat-Tire Car-OK4. Headlights-Work5. Battery-OK6. Starter-OK 7. Empty-Gas-Tank 8. Car-OK 9. Flat-Tire
We want to show Flat-Tire, given clauses 1-8. Using resolution, we can showthat clauses 1-8 along with clause 9 deduce an empty clause.
Can you trace the resolution steps?
Sentence Sentence Clause Form Clause FormExample:
(A B) (C D)
1. Eliminate (A B) (C D)2. Reduce scope of (A B) (C D)3. Distribute over
(A (C D)) (B (C D))(A C) (A D) (B C) (B D)
Set of clauses:{A C , A D , B C , B D}
Resolution Refutation Resolution Refutation AlgorithmAlgorithm
RESOLUTION-REFUTATION(KB)clauses set of clauses obtained from KB and new {}Repeat:
For each C, C’ in clauses dores RESOLVE(C,C’)If res contains the empty clause then
return yesnew new U res
If new clauses then return noclauses clauses U new
Efficient Propositional Inference
Two families of efficient algorithms for propositional inference:
Complete backtracking search algorithmsDPLL algorithm (Davis, Putnam, Logemann, Loveland)Incomplete local search algorithms
WalkSAT algorithm
The DPLL algorithmDetermine 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 heuristicPure 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 heuristicUnit clause: only one literal in the clauseThe only literal in a unit clause must be true.
Horn ClausesHorn Clause
A clause with at most one positive literal. KB: A Horn clause with one positive literal which can be written as α1 … αn β
Query: A Horn clause without positive literal α1 … αn
I.e. ( α1 … αn )
Horn clause logic is the basis for Logic Programming
Forward chaining for Horn Clauses
Idea: fire any rule whose premises are satisfied in the KB,
add its conclusion to the KB, until query is found
Backward chaining for Horn Clasues
Idea: work backwards from the query q:to prove q by BC,
check if q is known already, orprove by BC all premises of some rule concluding q
Avoid loops: check if new subgoal is already on the goal stack
Avoid repeated work: check if new subgoal1. has already been proved true, or2. has already failed
3.
SummarySummary
Propositional Logic Model of a KB Logical entailment Inference rules Resolution rule Clause form of a set of sentences Resolution refutation algorithm DPLL algorithm Horn clauses