(数理逻辑课件）MLChapter05ResolutionRefutationSystem.ppt

The original set of clauses: { C(x, f(x)), ~C(x, y) ∨ P(y, x), ~P(y, A) } Note: the negation of universal quantifier changes into existential quantifier, and after eliminating the existential quantifier , we get a constant A. ~C(x, y) ∨ P(y, x) ~C(A, y) ~P(y, A) C(x, f(x)) NIL {A/x} {A/x, f(x)/y} ~C(x, y) ∨ P(y, x) ~C(A, y) ∨ P(y, A) ~P(y, A) ∨ P(y, A) C(x, f(x)) P(f(A), A) {A/x} {A/x, f(A)/y} 数理逻辑练习 3 姓名 学号 Prove (1) ?x ( P(x)∨ Q(x)), ? x ?Q(x), ?x ( R(x)→ ? P(x))┠ ? x ?R(x) (2) ?x ( P(x) → (Q(x) ∨ R(x) ) ), ? ? x (P(x)∧R(x)) ┠ ?x ( P(x) → Q(x)) (3) ?x ?y( P(x,y) →( P(y,z) → Q(x,z))), ?y ? x (P(x. y)) ┠ ? x ? yQ(x, y) elininating * 超级计算学院 数理逻辑 第 5 章 ResolutionRefutation 超级计算学院 数理逻辑 第 5 章 ResolutionRefutation 超级计算学院 数理逻辑 第 5 章 ResolutionRefutation CHAPTER 5 RESOLUTION REFUTATION SYSTEMS The main idea of resolution refutation: Suppose we want to prove w from SP = {f1, … , fn}, where w, f1, … , fn are wffs(w is called consequence and S is called premise set) , we transform f1, … , fn and ? w into set of clauses Cf1, … , Cfn and C?w, let S = Cf1 ? , … , ? Cfn ? C?w We do resolution in S, if we can get the empty clause NIL, then we prove SP ┠ w Example: Whoever can read is literate, Dolphins are not literate , Some dolphins are intelligent, Prove: Some who are intelligent can not read. Introduce Predicates R(x) : x can read L(x) : x is literate D(x) : x is Dolphin I(x) : x is Intelligent  Example (1) Whoever can read is literate. f1 = ?x [R(x) ? L(x)] (2) Dolphins are not literate f2 = ?x [D(x) ? ? L(x)] (3) Some dolphins are intelligent f3 = ? x [D(x) ? I(x)] (4) Some who are intelligent can not read w = ? x[I(x) ? ? R(x)]