Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Resolution Proof Method
Resolution Proof Method
Definition 5.1.
The clauses C1 f l and C2 g l ( l is a literal and f , g FRes ) are called clashing clauses and they resolve upon the
literal l . We use the notation: C Res l (C1 , C 2 ) f g , where C is called the resolvent of the parent clauses C1 and C 2 .
Graphical representation:
C1 f l C 2 g l C1 l C 2 l
Resolution as an inference rule is a generalization of the rules: modus ponens, modus tollens and the syllogism rule.
Theorem 5.4.
A propositional formula U is a theorem (tautology) if and only if the empty clause can be derived from the conjunctive normal
form of U , using the resolution algorithm.
U is a theorem (tautology) if and only if CNF (U ) | Res .
Theorem 5.5.
Let U1 ,U 2 ,...,U n , V be propositional formulas.
U1 , U 2 ,...,U n | V if and only if U1 , U 2 ,...,U n | V if and only if
CNF (U1 U 2 ... U n V ) | Res .
The following theorem, inspired from Davis-Putman procedure [15], introduces a set of transformations used to simplify an
initial set of clauses, preserving its consistency/inconsistency.
Theorem 5.6.
A set S of propositional clauses can be simplified, preserving its consistency/inconsistency, by applying the following
transformations:
1. Delete the clauses that are tautologies because they are not useful in the derivation of the empty clause (from true we
cannot derive false).
2. Delete the clauses subsumed by other clauses of S .
C1 is subsumed by C 2 and C 2 subsumes C1 if there exists a clause C 3 such that C1 C2 C3 .
3. Delete every clause that contains a pure literal.
A pure literal in the set S of clauses is a literal that appears in a clause of S , but its negation does not appear in any clause
of S .
4. Let C l be a unit clause of S . Delete every clause containing l and delete l from every remaining clause.
Remarks:
If is obtained by applying all the above transformations on a set S of clauses, then S is a consistent set.
If the empty clause () is obtained by applying all the above transformations on a set S of clauses then S is inconsistent.
1. The level saturation strategy [52] generates levels of resolvents corresponding to the exploration of the whole search space
which contains all the possible resolvents.
2. The deletion strategy [15]: the resolvents that are tautologies or are subsumed by other clauses in the set S of clauses are
eliminated and they will not be used further in the resolution process because they produce redundant clauses.
3. The set-of-support strategy [65] avoids resolving two clauses belonging to a consistent subset of the initial set of clauses,
because the resolvents derived from a consistent set are irrelevant in the process of deriving (inconsistency).
Let S be a set of clauses. A subset Y of S is called the support set of S , if the set S \ Y is consistent. The set-of-support
resolution is the resolution of two clauses that are not both from the set S \ Y . The resolvents generated during the resolution
process are added to Y .
In order to make the resolution process more efficient, the refinements of resolution (lock resolution, linear resolution,
semantic resolution) impose restrictions on the clashing clauses.
The resolution process is a linear one: at each step one of the parent clauses is the resolvent derived at the previous step.
For a set S of clauses, a linear deduction of C n from S with C0 S as the top clause is symbolized graphically as follows:
C0 B0
C1 B1
C 0 is the top clause
C2 B2 C1 , C2 ,...Cn 1 , Cn are central clauses
B0 , B1 ,..., Bn 1 are side clauses
Bn 2 i 1,...,n : Ci Re s(Ci 1 , Bi 1 )
i 0,...,n 1 : Bi S {C0 , C1,...,Ci 2 }
C n 1 B n 1
Cn
We can combine the linear resolution with the deletion strategy and the completeness property is preserved.
This refinement of resolution also provides a strategy at the implementation level: backtracking algorithm. At each iteration, for
the current central clause there are more possible side clauses. We continue the resolution process choosing one side clause. If at
the iteration i the process is blocked (the central clause Ci is a tautology or it is an existing central clause: Ci C j , j < i , or
Ci does not have side clauses) or all the side clauses of Ci were used, then we go back to the previous iteration ( i 1 ) and we
choose another possible side clause for Ci 1 to continue the resolution process.
These two refinements of resolution are sound, but they are not complete:
soundness: If S |input
Res
/ unit
then S is inconsistent;
incompleteness: there exist inconsistent sets of clauses from which cannot be derived using input or unit resolution.
Definition 5.2.
A clause is called a positive clause if it contains only positive literals. A clause is called a negative clause if it contains only
negative literals. A clause is called Horn clause if it contains exactly one positive literal, all the other literals are negative.
Theorem 5.11.
The input resolution is complete on a set of Horn clauses with a negative top clause. (PROLOG).
Pr
Res Pr {, ,, , } is the alphabet;
Pr
FRes {} is the set of well- formed formulas;
- Pr
FRes is the set of all clauses built using the alphabet PRes
r
;
- is empty clause;
Pr
ARes is the set of axioms;
Pr
RRes {res Pr , fact} is the set of inference rules containing the resolution rule ( resPr ) and the factoring rule (fact).
f l1, g l2 |res Pr ( f ) ( g ) , where mgu (l1 , l2 ) , f , g FRes
Pr
.
l1 l2 ... lk lk 1 ... ln | fact (l1 lk 1 ... ln ) where mgu (l1, l2 ,...,lk )
Definition 5.3.
The predicate clauses C1 f l1 and C2 g l2 , without common free variables, are called clashing clauses if the literals l1
and l 2 are unifiable: there exists mgu (l1, l2 ) .
The binary resolvent of C1 and C 2 is C Res Pr (C1, C2 ) ( f ) ( g ) .
If C l1 l2 ... lk lk 1 ... ln ; l1 , l 2 ,..., l n -literals and mgu (l1, l2 ,...,lk )
Fact (C ) (l1) (lk 1) ... (ln ) is called a factor of C .
These two inference rules are combined and the definition of a predicate resolvent is obtained.
Definition 5.4.
The predicate resolvent of two parent clauses C1 and C 2 is one of the following:
1. the binary resolvent of C1 and C 2 ;
2. the binary resolvent of C1 and a factor of C 2 ;
3. the binary resolvent of a factor of C1 and C 2 ;
4. the binary resolvent of a factor of C1 and a factor of C 2 .
Theorem 5.12.
Let U1 ,U 2 ,U n ,V be first-order formulas.
| V ( | V ) if and only if (V ) c | PRes
r
.
U1 ,U 2 ,...,U n | V if and only if {U1c , U 2 c ,...,U n c , ( V )c } | Pr
Res .
All the refinements and strategies of resolution in propositional logic can be used in predicate logic. It is recommended to
rename the free variables in the initial set of predicate clauses, such that they will be distinct in different clauses.