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
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...
 
Namaste & G'day Postulate: A strongly-knit team wins on average over a less knit one Fundamentals: - Two teams face off with 4 players each - A polo team consists of players that each have assigned to them a measure of their ability (called a "Handicap" - 10 is highest, -2 lowest) I attempted to measure close-knitness of a team in terms of standard deviation (SD) of handicaps of the players. Failure: It turns out that, more often than, a team with a higher SD wins. In my language, that...
Hi all, I've been a roulette player for more than 10 years (although I took time off here and there) and it's only now that I'm trying to understand the physics of the game. Basically my strategy in roulette is to divide the wheel roughly into two halves (let's call them A and B). My theory is that in roulette there will invariably be variance. In other words, if A comes up 5 times in a row, B will be due to come up soon. However I have been proven wrong many times, and I have seen some...

Similar threads

Back
Top