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

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Agaton
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Logic
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on translating statements about Peter's feelings towards the groom and bride into First-Order Logic (FOL) using specific predicates such as Att(x), Likes(x,y), Rel(x,y), and Ab(x). Key conclusions include the establishment of FOL rules to demonstrate that Peter either likes the groom or did not attend the ceremony, and the implications of adding the statement that all relatives of the groom are abnormal under the Generalized Closed World Assumption (GCWA). The participants seek to validate these translations and explore logical deductions based on the provided premises.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of First-Order Logic (FOL) and its syntax
  • Familiarity with Generalized Closed World Assumption (GCWA)
  • Knowledge of logical predicates and quantifiers
  • Basic principles of logical entailment and inference
NEXT STEPS
  • Research how to apply FOL rules to derive conclusions from premises
  • Study the implications of the Generalized Closed World Assumption (GCWA) in logical reasoning
  • Explore logical disjunction and its inference rules in FOL
  • Learn about abnormality predicates and their impact on relational logic
USEFUL FOR

Logicians, computer scientists, and students of artificial intelligence who are interested in formal logic, knowledge representation, and reasoning under constraints.

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...
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
7K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
7K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 175 ·
6
Replies
175
Views
27K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
7K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
7K