Inference in first-order logic I

CIS 391 Introduction to Artificial Intelligence AIMA Chapter 9.1-9.2 (through p. 278) Chapter 9.5 (through p. 300)

Outline
Reducing first-order inference to propositional inference Unification Generalized Modus Ponens

CIS 391 - Intro to AI

Universal instantiation (UI)

Every instantiation of a universally quantified sentence is entailed by it:

Subst({v/g}, )
for any variable v and ground term g E.g., x King(x) Greedy(x) Evil(x) yields any or all of:

King(John) Greedy(John) Evil(John) King(Richard) Greedy(Richard) Evil(Richard) King(Father(John)) Greedy(Father(John)) Evil(Father(John))

3

CIS 391 - Intro to AI

Existential instantiation (EI)

For any sentence , variable v, and constant symbol k that does not appear elsewhere in the knowledge base:

Subst({v/k}, )
E.g., x Crown(x) OnHead(x,John) yields:
Crown(C1) OnHead(C1,John) provided C1 is a new constant symbol, called a Skolem constant

CIS 391 - Intro to AI

Existential Instantiation continued

UI can be applied several times to add new sentences
the new KB is logically equivalent to the old

EI can be applied once to replace the existential sentence

the new KB is not equivalent to the old but it is satisfiable iff the old KB was satisfiable

CIS 391 - Intro to AI

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.

CIS 391 - Intro to AI

Reduction contd.
Claim: 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)))

CIS 391 - Intro to AI

Reduction contd.
Theorem: Herbrand (1930). If a sentence 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 is entailed by this KB Problem: works if is entailed, loops if 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.)

CIS 391 - Intro to AI

Problems with propositionalization

1. 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

2. With p k-ary predicates and n constants, there are pnk instantiations.

With function symbols, it gets much, much worse!
9 CIS 391 - Intro to AI

Unification
We can get the inference Evil(John) immediately if we can find a substitution such that King(x) and Greedy(x) match King(John) and Greedy(y)

= {x/John,y/John} works Unify(,) = if =

p Knows(John,x) Knows(John,x) Knows(John,x) Knows(John,x) q Knows(John,Jane) Knows(y,OJ) Knows(y,Mother(y)) Knows(x,OJ)

CIS 391 - Intro to AI

10

Unification
We can get the inference Evil(John) immediately if we can find a substitution such that King(x) and Greedy(x) match King(John) and Greedy(y)

= {x/John,y/John} works Unify(,) = if =

p Knows(John,x) Knows(John,x) Knows(John,x) Knows(John,x) q Knows(John,Jane) Knows(y,OJ) Knows(y,Mother(y)) Knows(x,OJ) {x/Jane}}

CIS 391 - Intro to AI

11

Unification
We can get the inference Evil(John) immediately if we can find a substitution such that King(x) and Greedy(x) match King(John) and Greedy(y)

= {x/John,y/John} works Unify(,) = if =

p Knows(John,x) Knows(John,x) Knows(John,x) Knows(John,x) q Knows(John,Jane) Knows(y,OJ) Knows(y,Mother(y)) Knows(x,OJ) {x/Jane}} {x/OJ,y/John}}

CIS 391 - Intro to AI

12

Unification
We can get the inference Evil(John) immediately if we can find a substitution such that King(x) and Greedy(x) match King(John) and Greedy(y)

= {x/John,y/John} works Unify(,) = if =

p Knows(John,x) Knows(John,x) Knows(John,x) Knows(John,x) q Knows(John,Jane) Knows(y,OJ) Knows(y,Mother(y)) Knows(x,OJ) {x/Jane}} {x/OJ,y/John}} {y/John,x/Mother(John)}}

CIS 391 - Intro to AI

13

Unification
We can get the inference Evil(John) immediately if we can find a substitution such that King(x) and Greedy(x) match King(John) and Greedy(y)

= {x/John,y/John} works Unify(,) = if =

p Knows(John,x) Knows(John,x) Knows(John,x) Knows(John,x) q Knows(John,Jane) Knows(y,OJ) Knows(y,Mother(y)) Knows(x,OJ) {x/Jane}} {x/OJ,y/John}} {y/John,x/Mother(John)}} fail

CIS 391 - Intro to AI

14

Unification
We can get the inference Evil(John) immediately if we can find a substitution such that King(x) and Greedy(x) match King(John) and Greedy(y)

= {x/John,y/John} works Unify(,) = if =

p Knows(John,x) Knows(John,x) Knows(John,x) Knows(John,x) q Knows(John,Jane) Knows(y,OJ) Knows(y,Mother(y)) Knows(x,OJ) {x/Jane}} {x/OJ,y/John}} {y/John,x/Mother(John)}} fail

Standardizing apart eliminates overlap of variables, e.g., Knows(z17,OJ)

15

CIS 391 - Intro to AI

Unification
To unify Knows(John,x) and Knows(y,z), = {y/John, x/z } or = {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 }

CIS 391 - Intro to AI

16

The unification algorithm

CIS 391 - Intro to AI

17

The unification algorithm

CIS 391 - Intro to AI

18

Generalized Modus Ponens (GMP)

p1', p2', , pn', ( p1 p2 pn q) q
where pi' = pi for all i

p1' is King(John) p2' is Greedy(y) is {x/John,y/John} q is Evil(John)

p1 is King(x) p2 is Greedy(x) q is Evil(x)

GMP used with KB of definite clauses (exactly one positive literal) All variables assumed universally quantified

CIS 391 - Intro to AI

19

Soundness of GMP
Need to show that
p1', , pn', (p1 pn q) q

provided that pi' = pi for all i Lemma: For any definite clause p, we have p p by UI
1. (p1 pn q) (p1 pn q) = (p1 pn q) 2. p1', , pn' p1' pn' p1' pn' 3. From 1 and 2, q follows by ordinary Modus Ponens

CIS 391 - Intro to AI

20

Resolution: brief summary

Full first-order version: l1 lk, m1 mn (l1 li-1 li+1 lk m1 mj-1 mj+1 mn) where Unify(li, mj) = .
The two clauses are assumed to be standardized apart so that they share no variables.

For example,

Rich(x) Unhappy(x) Rich(Ken) Unhappy(Ken)

with = {x/Ken}
Apply resolution steps to CNF(KB ); complete for FOL
CIS 391 - Intro to AI 21

Conversion to CNF for FOL

Everyone who loves all animals is loved by someone: x [y Animal(y) Loves(x,y)] [y Loves(y,x)]
x [y Animal(y) Loves(x,y)] [y Loves(y,x)] x [y (Animal(y) Loves(x,y))] [y Loves(y,x)]

1. Eliminate biconditionals and implications

2. Move inwards: x p x p, x p x p
x [y Animal(y) Loves(x,y)] [y Loves(y,x)] x [y Animal(y) Loves(x,y)] [y Loves(y,x)]

CIS 391 - Intro to AI

22

Conversion to CNF contd.

3. Standardize variables: each quantifier should use a different one x [y Animal(y) Loves(x,y)] [z Loves(z,x)] Skolemize: a more general form of existential instantiation.
Each existential variable is replaced by a Skolem function of the enclosing universally quantified variables: x [Animal(F(x)) Loves(x,F(x))] Loves(G(x),x)

4.

5.

Drop universal quantifiers: [Animal(F(x)) Loves(x,F(x))] Loves(G(x),x)

6.

Distribute over : [Animal(F(x)) Loves(G(x),x)] [Loves(x,F(x)) Loves(G(x),x)]

CIS 391 - Intro to AI

23

Example knowledge base

The law says that it is a crime for an American to sell weapons to hostile nations. The country Nono, an enemy of America, has some missiles, and all of its missiles were sold to it by Colonel West, who is American.

Prove that Col. West is a criminal

CIS 391 - Intro to AI

24

Example knowledge base contd.

... it is a crime for an American to sell weapons to hostile nations:
American(x) Weapon(y) Sells(x,y,z) Hostile(z) Criminal(x)

Nono has some missiles, i.e., x Owns(Nono,x) Missile(x):

Owns(Nono,M1) and Missile(M1)

all of its missiles were sold to it by Colonel West

Missile(x) Owns(Nono,x) Sells(West,x,Nono) Missile(x) Weapon(x) Enemy(x,America) Hostile(x)

Missiles are weapons:

An enemy of America counts as "hostile: West, who is American

American(West)

The country Nono, an enemy of America

Enemy(Nono,America)
CIS 391 - Intro to AI 25

Resolution proof: definite clauses

CIS 391 - Intro to AI

26

Example proof:

Did Curiosity kill the cat?

Jack owns a dog. Every dog owner is an animal lover. No animal lover kills an animal. Either Jack or Curiosity killed the cat, who is named Tuna. Did Curiosity kill the cat? The axioms can be represented as follows: A. (x) Dog(x) ^ Owns(Jack,x) B. (x) ((y) Dog(y) ^ Owns(x, y)) => AnimalLover(x) C. (x) AnimalLover(x) => (y) Animal(y) => ~Kills(x,y) D. Kills(Jack,Tuna) Kills(Curiosity,Tuna) E. Cat(Tuna) F. (x) Cat(x) => Animal(x)
(This and next 2 slides adapted from CMSC421 Fall 2006, Univ. of Maryland)

CIS 391 - Intro to AI

27

Example: Did Curiosity kill the cat?

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Dog(spike) Owns(Jack,spike) ~Dog(y) v ~Owns(x, y) v AnimalLover(x) ~AnimalLover(x1) v ~Animal(y1) v ~Kills(x1,y1) Kills(Jack,Tuna) v Kills(Curiosity,Tuna) Cat(Tuna) ~Cat(x2) v Animal(x2)

CIS 391 - Intro to AI

28

Example: Did Curiosity kill the cat?

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. Dog(spike) Owns(Jack,spike) ~Dog(y) v ~Owns(x, y) v AnimalLover(x) ~AnimalLover(x1) v ~Animal(y1) v ~Kills(x1,y1) Kills(Jack,Tuna) v Kills(Curiosity,Tuna) Cat(Tuna) ~Cat(x2) v Animal(x2) ~Kills(Curiosity,Tuna) negated goal Kills(Jack,Tuna) 5,8 ~AnimalLover(Jack) V ~Animal(Tuna) 9,4 x1/Jack,y1/Tuna ~Dog(y) v ~Owns(Jack,y) V ~Animal(Tuna) 10,3 x/Jack ~Owns(Jack,spike) v ~Animal(Tuna) 11,1 ~Animal(Tuna) 12,2 ~Cat(Tuna) 13,7 x2/Tuna False 14,6

CIS 391 - Intro to AI

29