Is Peter's Dislike for the Groom Supported by FOL Rules and GCWA?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Agaton
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Logic
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the logical implications of Peter's feelings towards the groom based on First-Order Logic (FOL) rules and the Generalized Causal World Assumption (GCWA). Key points include the translation of relational statements regarding attendance at the wedding, familial relationships, and preferences into FOL. Participants seek to demonstrate that Peter either likes the groom or did not attend the ceremony, and to analyze whether Peter's dislike for the groom is supported by the existing knowledge base. Additionally, there is an inquiry into how adding a statement about the abnormality of the groom's relatives would affect the conclusions drawn under GCWA. The conversation emphasizes logical reasoning and inference techniques in relation to the scenario.
Agaton
Messages
26
Reaction score
0
We have the following sentences which I translated them to FOL by using the language:

Att(x) for "x attended the ceremony"
Likes(x,y) for "x likes y"
Rel(x,y) for "x is a relative of y"
Ab(x) for "x is an abnormal relative"


(a) Only all the normal relatives attended the wedding ceremony.
a) ∀x Att(x) ------ > ¬ Ab(x)

(b) Everybody who attended the ceremony was either a relative of the groom or a relative of the bride.
b) ∀x∀y∀z Att(x) -------> Rel (X, groom) \/ Rel (x, bride)

(c) Groom’s relatives normally like the groom.
c) ∀x Rel (x, Groom) /\ ¬ Ab(x) ------ > Like (x,groom)

(d) Bride’s relatives normally like the bride.
d) ∀z Rel (z, Groom) ¬ Ab(z) ------ > Like (z,groom)

(e) Peter does not like bride.
e) ¬ Likes (Peter, bride)

I suppose my translation is correct.

Now the are three questions:

(1) How can I show, by using FOL rules, that Peter likes the groom or he did not attend the ceremony.

(2) Check if the claim, that Peter does not like groom, is entailed by the knowledge base under GCWA.


(3) Show, that if the sentence “All the relatives of the groom are abnormal” was added to the knowledge base, it would follow, under the GCWA, that Peter does not like the groom.

Any idea? Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Did you try starting with your conclusion and working backwards? What rules allow you to infer a disjunction? Or put it into another form and see what your next-to-last step would need to be.
 
Thanks honestrsewater,

I am still reading about it...
 
I was reading documentation about the soundness and completeness of logic formal systems. Consider the following $$\vdash_S \phi$$ where ##S## is the proof-system making part the formal system and ##\phi## is a wff (well formed formula) of the formal language. Note the blank on left of the turnstile symbol ##\vdash_S##, as far as I can tell it actually represents the empty set. So what does it mean ? I guess it actually means ##\phi## is a theorem of the formal system, i.e. there is a...

Similar threads

Back
Top