Why do we need knowledge representation?

Knowledge representation makes complex software easier to define and maintain than
procedural code and can be used in expert systems. For example, talking to experts in terms of
business rules rather than code lessens the semantic gap between users and developers and
makes development of complex systems more practical.

What is reasoning in knowledge representation?

Knowledge representation and reasoning (KRR) is the study of how to represent information
about the world in a form that can be used by a computer system to solve and reason about
complex problems. It is an important field of artificial intelligence (AI) research.

What is knowledge and reasoning?

Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KRR) is a field in artificial intelligence (AI)

that focuses on how to represent information in a way that a computer system can use
to make decisions with human-like reasoning. Knowledge representation involves
structuring information in a form that a computer can understand.
What are the 4 approaches to knowledge representation?

There are four main approaches to knowledge representation in AI: relational,

inheritable, inferential, and procedural.

We all are familiar with the word “Knowledge,” but have you heard of “Knowledge
Representation” and “Knowledge Representation in AI”? Think like this: You’re trying to
make a perfect basketball shot. Think about all the things your mind and body do to make it
happen.
Now, imagine trying to teach the same to a machine. It’s a big challenge since you’ll need a vast
amount of knowledge to present this to the machine. Even simple scenarios like lifting a pen off
the desk will need a big set of rules and descriptions.

That’s where ‘Knowledge Representation in AI’ comes in – it’s the key to making all of this
work. Here, knowledge representation plays a vital role in setting up the environment and gives
all the details necessary to the system. It’s like a guiding light that unlocks the machine’s
potential.

Let’s explore how AI uses “knowledge” to change how businesses operate, and I’ll make sure to
keep you engaged till the end.

What is Knowledge Representation in AI?

‘Knowledge representation in AI’ is like giving computers a smart brain. It’s the magic that
allows them to understand and use real-world information to solve tricky problems.

In simple terms, it’s about teaching AI to think and reason using symbols and automation. For
instance, if we want AI to diagnose illnesses, we must provide it with the right knowledge at the
right time.

So, in a nutshell, it’s all about making computers brilliant problem solvers by communicating in
their unique “language” of information or a way that a computer system can understand and
apply it to tackle real-world problems or manage everyday tasks.

There are two key ideas in Knowledge Representation:

1. Knowledge

Knowledge is like the wisdom a computer gathers from its experiences and learning. Imagine it
as the “know-how” that makes an AI (like a chatbot) savvy. In Artificial Intelligence, a machine
 takes specific actions based on what it has learned in the past. For example, think of an AI
winning a chess game—it can only do that if it knows how to play and win.

2. Representation

Representation is how computers translate their knowledge into something useful. It’s like
turning knowledge into a language computers understand. This includes things like:

 Objects: Info about the objects in our world, like knowing buses need drivers or that guitars have
strings.

 Events: Everything happening in our world, from natural disasters to great achievements.

 Performance: Understanding how people behave in different situations. This helps AI grasp the
human side of knowledge.

 Facts: This is the factual stuff about our world, like knowing the Earth isn’t flat but not a perfect
sphere either.

 Meta Knowledge: Think of it as what we already know, which helps AI make sense of things.

 Knowledge Base: It’s like a big library of information, like a treasure trove of facts about a
specific topic, such as road construction.

What are the Different Types of Knowledge in AI?

In simple terms, knowledge is what we know from our experiences, facts, data, and situations. In
artificial intelligence, there are various types of knowledge that need to be represented.
 1. Declarative Knowledge (The “What” Knowledge)

o It’s all about facts and concepts, helping describe things in simple terms.

 2. Structural Knowledge (The “How Things Relate” Knowledge)

o This knowledge helps AI understand relationships between concepts and objects, aiding
problem-solving.

 3. Procedural Knowledge (The “How-To” Knowledge)

o This is like a manual for tasks, with specific rules and strategies to follow.

 4. Meta Knowledge (What We Already Know)

o It’s knowledge about knowledge, including categories, plans, and past learning.
 5. Heuristic Knowledge (Learning from Experience)

o This type helps AI make decisions based on past experiences, like using old techniques to solve
new problems.

These types of knowledge equip AI to understand and solve problems, follow instructions, make
informed decisions, and adapt to different situations.

Four Fundamental Knowledge Representation Techniques

in AI
In the world of artificial intelligence, we use various methods to express what AI knows. The
choice depends on how information is organized, what the designer thinks, and how the AI
system works. Therefore, good knowledge representation should be clear, practical, and easy to
handle. Here are four main knowledge representation techniques used in

AI:

1. Logical Representation

In AI, we communicate using formal logic, much like following a rulebook. Imagine AI as a
student following a strict set of rules in a school. These rules ensure that information is shared
with minimal mistakes and that AI’s conclusions are either true or false. Though it can be tricky,
logical representation is like the foundation of many programming languages, helping AI think
logically.

2. Semantic Network

Think of a semantic network as a giant web with connected nodes and links. Nodes stand for
objects or ideas, while links show how they connect. This method simplifies how AI stores and
arranges information, much like a mind map. It’s more natural and expressive compared to
logical representation, allowing AI to grasp complex relationships.

3. Frame Representation

Frames act like information ID cards for real-world things. They contain details and values
describing these things. Imagine each frame as a file containing important information. Frames
can be flexible and, when connected, create a robust knowledge system. This method is versatile
and commonly used in AI.

4. Production Rules

Imagine AI using “if-then” statements to decide what to do. If a specific situation arises, AI
knows exactly what action to take. This method is like having a playbook. Production rules are
modular, making it easy to update and add new rules. While they may not always be the fastest,
they let AI make smart choices and adapt to different scenarios.

These techniques give AI the tools it needs to organize and use knowledge effectively, making it
smarter and more capable.

The Cycle of Knowledge Representation in AI

To make AI intelligent, we need a way to gather vital information. That’s where the AI
knowledge cycle and its essential components come into play. These components help AI
understand the world better and make intelligent choices. It’s like giving AI the tools to learn,
adapt, and act wisely.

1. Perception: AI takes in information from its surroundings, like listening, seeing, or reading.
This helps it understand the world. For example, it listens to spoken words, sees images, and
reads text to gather knowledge about its environment.

2. Learning: AI uses deep learning algorithms to study and remember what it perceives. It’s like
taking notes to get better at something. Through learning, AI becomes skilled at recognizing
patterns and making predictions based on its experiences.

3. Knowledge and Reasoning: These parts are like AI’s brain. They help it understand and
think smartly. They find important information for AI to learn. AI’s knowledge and reasoning
components sift through its data to identify valuable insights, allowing it to make informed
decisions.
4. Planning and Doing: AI uses what it learned to make plans and take action. It’s like using
knowledge to make good decisions. With its plans in place, AI carries out tasks efficiently and
adapts to changes in its environment, demonstrating intelligent behavior.

Approaches to Knowledge Representation in AI

1. Simple Relational Knowledge: This is like organizing facts neatly in columns, often used in
databases. It’s straightforward but not great for drawing conclusions. For instance, in a
database, you can use this to list relationships between people and their addresses.

2. Inheritable Knowledge: Here, data is stored in a hierarchy, like a family tree. For example,
you can use this to show how animals relate to different species or how products belong to
various categories. It helps us understand relationships between things, and it’s better than the
simple relational method.

3. Inferential Knowledge: This is the precise way of using formal logic to guarantee accurate
facts and decisions. For instance, you can use this to deduce that if “All men are mortal” and
“Socrates is a man,” then “Socrates is mortal.”

4. Procedural Knowledge: AI uses small programs or rules (like recipes) to perform tasks. For
example, it can follow rules to play chess or diagnose diseases. Despite its limitations, it is
useful for specialized tasks.

What Makes a Good Knowledge Representation System?

A good knowledge representation system should have these qualities:

1. Representational Adequacy: It must be able to represent all types of knowledge so the AI

understands them.

2. Inferential Adequacy: The system should be flexible, allowing it to adjust old knowledge to
fit new information.
 3. Inferential Efficiency: It should guide AI to make smart decisions quickly by pointing it in
the right direction.

4. Acquisitional Efficiency: The system should easily learn new information, add it to its
knowledge, and use it to work better.

Why Knowledge Representation Matters for AI Systems?

Knowledge representation gives AI the power to handle complex tasks based on what it has
learned from human experiences, rules, and responses. It’s like the AI’s “instruction
manual” that it can read and follow.

Moreover, AI relies on this knowledge to solve problems, complete tasks, and make decisions. It
helps AI understand, communicate in human language, plan, and tackle challenging areas.
Therefore, it’s the backbone of AI technology all around us.

What are the Business Benefits of Knowledge

Representation in AI?

 Streamlines data integration and consolidation, improving data management.

 Keeps information up-to-date, ensuring accuracy and relevancy.

 Gathers valuable feedback for product and service enhancements.

 Tracks performance metrics, aiding in continuous improvement.

 Ensures consistency across operations, leading to better customer experiences.

 Extracts insights from data and offers real-time information for informed decision-making.

Read Also: Exploring HyperIntelligence: How Evolving AI Capability Can Drive Business Value?
Frequently Asked Questions

What is the significance of knowledge representation in AI?

Knowledge representation in AI is like the way our brain stores and organizes information,
helping AI systems think and make decisions more like humans do.

What are the 4 types of knowledge representation?

There are four main approaches to knowledge representation in AI: relational, inheritable,
inferential, and procedural.

Why is knowledge representation important?

Knowledge representation is important in AI because it allows computers to understand, store,

and manipulate human knowledge, enabling them to solve complex problems, make decisions,
and perform tasks that require intelligence.

What are the objectives of knowledge representation?

Knowledge representation’s goal is to show relationships between ideas and objects so we can
draw conclusions and make inferences easily.
Knowledge representation and reasoning
Knowledge representation and reasoning (KRR, KR&R, or KR²) is a field of artificial
intelligence (AI) dedicated to representing information about the world in a form that a
computer system can use to solve complex tasks, such as diagnosing a medical
condition or having a natural-language dialog. Knowledge representation incorporates
findings from psychology[1] about how humans solve problems and represent knowledge,
in order to design formalisms that make complex systems easier to design and build.
Knowledge representation and reasoning also incorporates findings from logic to
automate various kinds of reasoning.

Examples of knowledge representation formalisms include semantic

networks, frames, rules, logic programs, and ontologies. Examples of automated
reasoning engines include inference engines, theorem provers, model generators,
and classifiers.

Artificial intelligence

Major goals

 Artificial general intelligence

 Intelligent agent
 Recursive self-improvement
 Planning
 Computer vision
 General game playing
 Knowledge reasoning
 Natural language processing
 Robotics
 AI safety

Approaches
 Applications

Philosophy

History

Glossary

The earliest work in computerized knowledge representation was focused on general

problem-solvers such as the General Problem Solver (GPS) system developed by Allen
Newell and Herbert A. Simon in 1959 and the Advice Taker proposed by John
McCarthy also in 1959. GPS featured data structures for planning and decomposition.
The system would begin with a goal. It would then decompose that goal into sub-goals
and then set out to construct strategies that could accomplish each subgoal. The
Advisor Taker, on the other hand, proposed the use of the predicate calculus to
represent common sense reasoning.

Many of the early approaches to knowledge represention in Artificial Intelligence (AI)

used graph representations and semantic networks, similar to knowledge graphs today.
In such approaches, problem solving was a form of graph traversal[2] or path-finding, as
in the A* search algorithm. Typical applications included robot plan-formation and
game-playing.

Other researchers focused on developing automated theorem-provers for first-order

logic, motivated by the use of mathematical logic to formalise mathematics and to
automate the proof of mathematical theorems. A major step in this direction was the
development of the resolution method by John Alan Robinson.

In the meanwhile, John McCarthy and Pat Hayes developed the situation calculus as a
logical representation of common sense knowledge about the laws of cause and
effect. Cordell Green, in turn, showed how to do robot plan-formation by applying
resolution to the situation calculus. He also showed how to use resolution for question-
answering and automatic programming.[3]

In contrast, researchers at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) rejected the

resolution uniform proof procedure paradigm and advocated the procedural embedding
of knowledge instead.[4] The resulting conflict between the use of logical representations
and the use of procedural representations was resolved in the early 1970s with the
development of logic programming and Prolog, using SLD resolution to treat Horn
clauses as goal-reduction procedures.

The early development of logic programming was largely a European phenomenon. In

North America, AI researchers such as Ed Feigenbaum and Frederick Hayes-
Roth advocated the representation of domain-specific knowledge rather than general-
purpose reasoning.[5]

These efforts led to the cognitive revolution in psychology and to the phase of AI
focused on knowledge representation that resulted in expert systems in the 1970s and
80s, production systems, frame languages, etc. Rather than general problem solvers, AI
changed its focus to expert systems that could match human competence on a specific
task, such as medical diagnosis.[6]

Expert systems gave us the terminology still in use today where AI systems are divided
into a knowledge base, which includes facts and rules about a problem domain, and
an inference engine, which applies the knowledge in the knowledge base to answer
questions and solve problems in the domain. In these early systems the facts in the
knowledge base tended to be a fairly flat structure, essentially assertions about the
values of variables used by the rules.[7]

Meanwhile, Marvin Minsky developed the concept of frame in the mid-1970s.[8] A frame
is similar to an object class: It is an abstract description of a category describing things
in the world, problems, and potential solutions. Frames were originally used on systems
geared toward human interaction, e.g. understanding natural language and the social
settings in which various default expectations such as ordering food in a restaurant
narrow the search space and allow the system to choose appropriate responses to
dynamic situations.

It was not long before the frame communities and the rule-based researchers realized
that there was a synergy between their approaches. Frames were good for representing
the real world, described as classes, subclasses, slots (data values) with various
constraints on possible values. Rules were good for representing and utilizing complex
logic such as the process to make a medical diagnosis. Integrated systems were
developed that combined frames and rules. One of the most powerful and well known
was the 1983 Knowledge Engineering Environment (KEE) from Intellicorp. KEE had a
complete rule engine with forward and backward chaining. It also had a complete frame-
based knowledge base with triggers, slots (data values), inheritance, and message
passing. Although message passing originated in the object-oriented community rather
than AI it was quickly embraced by AI researchers as well in environments such as KEE
and in the operating systems for Lisp machines from Symbolics, Xerox, and Texas
Instruments.[9]

The integration of frames, rules, and object-oriented programming was significantly

driven by commercial ventures such as KEE and Symbolics spun off from various
research projects. At the same time, there was another strain of research that was less
commercially focused and was driven by mathematical logic and automated theorem
proving.[citation needed] One of the most influential languages in this research was the KL-
ONE language of the mid-'80s. KL-ONE was a frame language that had a rigorous
semantics, formal definitions for concepts such as an Is-A relation.[10] KL-ONE and
languages that were influenced by it such as Loom had an automated reasoning engine
that was based on formal logic rather than on IF-THEN rules. This reasoner is called the
classifier. A classifier can analyze a set of declarations and infer new assertions, for
example, redefine a class to be a subclass or superclass of some other class that
wasn't formally specified. In this way the classifier can function as an inference engine,
deducing new facts from an existing knowledge base. The classifier can also provide
consistency checking on a knowledge base (which in the case of KL-ONE languages is
also referred to as an Ontology).[11]

Another area of knowledge representation research was the problem of common-sense

reasoning. One of the first realizations learned from trying to make software that can
function with human natural language was that humans regularly draw on an extensive
foundation of knowledge about the real world that we simply take for granted but that is
not at all obvious to an artificial agent, such as basic principles of common-sense
physics, causality, intentions, etc. An example is the frame problem, that in an event
driven logic there need to be axioms that state things maintain position from one
moment to the next unless they are moved by some external force. In order to make a
true artificial intelligence agent that can converse with humans using natural
language and can process basic statements and questions about the world, it is
essential to represent this kind of knowledge.[12] In addition to McCarthy and Hayes'
situation calculus, one of the most ambitious programs to tackle this problem was Doug
Lenat's Cyc project. Cyc established its own Frame language and had large numbers of
analysts document various areas of common-sense reasoning in that language. The
knowledge recorded in Cyc included common-sense models of time, causality, physics,
intentions, and many others.[13]

The starting point for knowledge representation is the knowledge representation

hypothesis first formalized by Brian C. Smith in 1985:[14]

Any mechanically embodied intelligent process will be comprised of structural

ingredients that a) we as external observers naturally take to represent a propositional
account of the knowledge that the overall process exhibits, and b) independent of such
external semantic attribution, play a formal but causal and essential role in engendering
the behavior that manifests that knowledge.
One of the most active areas of knowledge representation research is the Semantic
Web.[citation needed] The Semantic Web seeks to add a layer of semantics (meaning) on top of
the current Internet. Rather than indexing web sites and pages via keywords, the
Semantic Web creates large ontologies of concepts. Searching for a concept will be
more effective than traditional text only searches. Frame languages and automatic
classification play a big part in the vision for the future Semantic Web. The automatic
classification gives developers technology to provide order on a constantly evolving
network of knowledge. Defining ontologies that are static and incapable of evolving on
the fly would be very limiting for Internet-based systems. The classifier technology
provides the ability to deal with the dynamic environment of the Internet.

Recent projects funded primarily by the Defense Advanced Research Projects

Agency (DARPA) have integrated frame languages and classifiers with markup
languages based on XML. The Resource Description Framework (RDF) provides the
basic capability to define classes, subclasses, and properties of objects. The Web
Ontology Language (OWL) provides additional levels of semantics and enables
integration with classification engines.[15][16]

Overview
Knowledge-representation is a field of artificial intelligence that focuses on designing
computer representations that capture information about the world that can be used for
solving complex problems.

The justification for knowledge representation is that conventional procedural code is

not the best formalism to use to solve complex problems. Knowledge representation
makes complex software easier to define and maintain than procedural code and can
be used in expert systems.

For example, talking to experts in terms of business rules rather than code lessens the
semantic gap between users and developers and makes development of complex
systems more practical.

Knowledge representation goes hand in hand with automated reasoning because one of
the main purposes of explicitly representing knowledge is to be able to reason about
that knowledge, to make inferences, assert new knowledge, etc. Virtually all knowledge
representation languages have a reasoning or inference engine as part of the system.[17]

A key trade-off in the design of knowledge representation formalisms is that between

expressivity and tractability.[18] First Order Logic (FOL), with its high expressive power
and ability to formalise much of mathematics, is a standard for comparing the
expressibility of knowledge representation languages.

Arguably, FOL has two drawbacks as a knowledge representation formalism in its own
right, namely ease of use and efficiency of implementation. Firstly, because of its high
expressive power, FOL allows many ways of expressing the same information, and this
can make it hard for users to formalise or even to understand knowledge expressed in
complex, mathematically-oriented ways. Secondly, because of its complex proof
procedures, it can be difficult for users to understand complex proofs and explanations,
and it can be hard for implementations to be efficient. As a consequence, unrestricted
FOL can be intimidating for many software developers.

One of the key discoveries of AI research in the 1970s was that languages that do not
have the full expressive power of FOL can still provide close to the same expressive
power of FOL, but can be easier for both the average developer and for the computer to
understand. Many of the early AI knowledge representation formalisms, from databases
to semantic nets to production systems, can be viewed as making various design
decisions about how to balance expressive power with naturalness of expression and
efficiency.[19] In particular, this balancing act was a driving motivation for the
development of IF-THEN rules in rule-based expert systems.

A similar balancing act was also a motivation for the development of logic
programming (LP) and the logic programming language Prolog. Logic programs have a
rule-based syntax, which is easily confused with the IF-THEN syntax of production rules.
But logic programs have a well-defined logical semantics, whereas production systems
do not.

The earliest form of logic programming was based on the Horn clause subset of FOL.
But later extensions of LP included the negation as failure inference rule, which turns LP
into a non-monotonic logic for default reasoning. The resulting extended semantics of
LP is a variation of the standard semantics of Horn clauses and FOL, and is a form of
database semantics, [20] which includes the unique name assumption and a form
of closed world assumption. These assumptions are much harder to state and reason
with explicitly using the standard semantics of FOL.

In a key 1993 paper on the topic, Randall Davis of MIT outlined five distinct roles to
analyze a knowledge representation framework:[21]

 "A knowledge representation (KR) is most fundamentally a surrogate, a substitute for the
thing itself, used to enable an entity to determine consequences by thinking rather than
acting," [21] i.e., "by reasoning about the world rather than taking action in it."[21]
 "It is a set of ontological commitments",[21] i.e., "an answer to the question: In what terms
should I think about the world?" [21]
 "It is a fragmentary theory of intelligent reasoning, expressed in terms of three components:
(i) the representation's fundamental conception of intelligent reasoning; (ii) the set of
inferences the representation sanctions; and (iii) the set of inferences it recommends."[21]
 "It is a medium for pragmatically efficient computation",[21] i.e., "the computational
environment in which thinking is accomplished. One contribution to this pragmatic efficiency
is supplied by the guidance a representation provides for organizing information" [21] so as
"to facilitate making the recommended inferences."[21]
 "It is a medium of human expression",[21] i.e., "a language in which we say things about the
world."[21]
Knowledge representation and reasoning are a key enabling technology for
the Semantic Web. Languages based on the Frame model with automatic classification
provide a layer of semantics on top of the existing Internet. Rather than searching via
text strings as is typical today, it will be possible to define logical queries and find pages
that map to those queries.[15] The automated reasoning component in these systems is
an engine known as the classifier. Classifiers focus on the subsumption relations in a
knowledge base rather than rules. A classifier can infer new classes and dynamically
change the ontology as new information becomes available. This capability is ideal for
the ever-changing and evolving information space of the Internet.[22]

The Semantic Web integrates concepts from knowledge representation and reasoning
with markup languages based on XML. The Resource Description Framework (RDF)
provides the basic capabilities to define knowledge-based objects on the Internet with
basic features such as Is-A relations and object properties. The Web Ontology
Language (OWL) adds additional semantics and integrates with automatic classification
reasoners.[16]
Characteristics
In 1985, Ron Brachman categorized the core issues for knowledge representation as
follows:[23]

 Primitives. What is the underlying framework used to represent knowledge? Semantic

networks were one of the first knowledge representation primitives. Also, data structures
and algorithms for general fast search. In this area, there is a strong overlap with research
in data structures and algorithms in computer science. In early systems, the Lisp
programming language, which was modeled after the lambda calculus, was often used as a
form of functional knowledge representation. Frames and Rules were the next kind of
primitive. Frame languages had various mechanisms for expressing and enforcing
constraints on frame data. All data in frames are stored in slots. Slots are analogous to
relations in entity-relation modeling and to object properties in object-oriented modeling.
Another technique for primitives is to define languages that are modeled after First Order
Logic (FOL). The most well known example is Prolog, but there are also many special-
purpose theorem-proving environments. These environments can validate logical models
and can deduce new theories from existing models. Essentially they automate the process a
logician would go through in analyzing a model. Theorem-proving technology had some
specific practical applications in the areas of software engineering. For example, it is
possible to prove that a software program rigidly adheres to a formal logical specification.
 Meta-representation. This is also known as the issue of reflection in computer science. It
refers to the capability of a formalism to have access to information about its own state. An
example would be the meta-object protocol in Smalltalk and CLOS that gives developers
run time access to the class objects and enables them to dynamically redefine the structure
of the knowledge base even at run time. Meta-representation means the knowledge
representation language is itself expressed in that language. For example, in most Frame
based environments all frames would be instances of a frame class. That class object can
be inspected at run time, so that the object can understand and even change its internal
structure or the structure of other parts of the model. In rule-based environments, the rules
were also usually instances of rule classes. Part of the meta protocol for rules were the
meta rules that prioritized rule firing.
 Incompleteness. Traditional logic requires additional axioms and constraints to deal with the
real world as opposed to the world of mathematics. Also, it is often useful to associate
degrees of confidence with a statement, i.e., not simply say "Socrates is Human" but rather
"Socrates is Human with confidence 50%". This was one of the early innovations
from expert systems research which migrated to some commercial tools, the ability to
associate certainty factors with rules and conclusions. Later research in this area is known
as fuzzy logic.[24]
 Definitions and universals vs. facts and defaults. Universals are general statements about
the world such as "All humans are mortal". Facts are specific examples of universals such
as "Socrates is a human and therefore mortal". In logical terms definitions and universals
are about universal quantification while facts and defaults are about existential
quantifications. All forms of knowledge representation must deal with this aspect and most
do so with some variant of set theory, modeling universals as sets and subsets and
definitions as elements in those sets.
 Non-monotonic reasoning. Non-monotonic reasoning allows various kinds of hypothetical
reasoning. The system associates facts asserted with the rules and facts used to justify
them and as those facts change updates the dependent knowledge as well. In rule based
systems this capability is known as a truth maintenance system.[25]
 Expressive adequacy. The standard that Brachman and most AI researchers use to
measure expressive adequacy is usually First Order Logic (FOL). Theoretical limitations
mean that a full implementation of FOL is not practical. Researchers should be clear about
how expressive (how much of full FOL expressive power) they intend their representation to
be.[26]
 Reasoning efficiency. This refers to the run time efficiency of the system. The ability of the
knowledge base to be updated and the reasoner to develop new inferences in a reasonable
period of time. In some ways, this is the flip side of expressive adequacy. In general, the
more powerful a representation, the more it has expressive adequacy, the less efficient
its automated reasoning engine will be. Efficiency was often an issue, especially for early
applications of knowledge representation technology. They were usually implemented in
interpreted environments such as Lisp, which were slow compared to more traditional
platforms of the time.
Ontology engineering
Main articles: Ontology engineering and Ontology language

In the early years of knowledge-based systems the knowledge-bases were fairly small.
The knowledge-bases that were meant to actually solve real problems rather than do
proof of concept demonstrations needed to focus on well defined problems. So for
example, not just medical diagnosis as a whole topic, but medical diagnosis of certain
kinds of diseases.

As knowledge-based technology scaled up, the need for larger knowledge bases and
for modular knowledge bases that could communicate and integrate with each other
became apparent. This gave rise to the discipline of ontology engineering, designing
and building large knowledge bases that could be used by multiple projects. One of the
leading research projects in this area was the Cyc project. Cyc was an attempt to build
a huge encyclopedic knowledge base that would contain not just expert knowledge but
common-sense knowledge. In designing an artificial intelligence agent, it was soon
realized that representing common-sense knowledge, knowledge that humans simply
take for granted, was essential to make an AI that could interact with humans using
natural language. Cyc was meant to address this problem. The language they defined
was known as CycL.

After CycL, a number of ontology languages have been developed. Most are declarative
languages, and are either frame languages, or are based on first-order logic.
Modularity—the ability to define boundaries around specific domains and problem
spaces—is essential for these languages because as stated by Tom Gruber, "Every
ontology is a treaty–a social agreement among people with common motive in sharing."
There are always many competing and differing views that make any general-purpose
ontology impossible. A general-purpose ontology would have to be applicable in any
domain and different areas of knowledge need to be unified.[27]

There is a long history of work attempting to build ontologies for a variety of task
domains, e.g., an ontology for liquids,[28] the lumped element model widely used in
representing electronic circuits (e.g.[29]), as well as ontologies for time, belief, and even
programming itself. Each of these offers a way to see some part of the world.
The lumped element model, for instance, suggests that we think of circuits in terms of
components with connections between them, with signals flowing instantaneously along
the connections. This is a useful view, but not the only possible one. A different ontology
arises if we need to attend to the electrodynamics in the device: Here signals propagate
at finite speed and an object (like a resistor) that was previously viewed as a single
component with an I/O behavior may now have to be thought of as an extended
medium through which an electromagnetic wave flows.

Ontologies can of course be written down in a wide variety of languages and notations
(e.g., logic, LISP, etc.); the essential information is not the form of that language but the
content, i.e., the set of concepts offered as a way of thinking about the world. Simply put,
the important part is notions like connections and components, not the choice between
writing them as predicates or LISP constructs.

The commitment made selecting one or another ontology can produce a sharply
different view of the task at hand. Consider the difference that arises in selecting the
lumped element view of a circuit rather than the electrodynamic view of the same device.
As a second example, medical diagnosis viewed in terms of rules (e.g., MYCIN) looks
substantially different from the same task viewed in terms of frames (e.g., INTERNIST).
Where MYCIN sees the medical world as made up of empirical associations connecting
symptom to disease, INTERNIST sees a set of prototypes, in particular prototypical
diseases, to be matched against the case at hand.

References
[edit]

1. ^ Schank, Roger; Abelson, Robert (1977). Scripts, Plans, Goals, and Understanding: An Inquiry
Into Human Knowledge Structures. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
2. ^ Doran, J. E.; Michie, D. (1966-09-20). "Experiments with the Graph Traverser program". Proc.
R. Soc. Lond. A. 294 (1437): 235–
259. Bibcode:1966RSPSA.294..235D. doi:10.1098/rspa.1966.0205. S2CID 21698093.
3. ^ Green, Cordell. Application of Theorem Proving to Problem Solving (PDF). IJCAI 1969.
4. ^ Hewitt, C., 2009. Inconsistency robustness in logic programs. arXiv preprint
arXiv:0904.3036.
5. ^ Kowalski, Robert (1986). "The limitation of logic". Proceedings of the 1986 ACM fourteenth
annual conference on Computer science - CSC '86. pp. 7–
13. doi:10.1145/324634.325168. ISBN 0-89791-177-6. S2CID 17211581.
6. ^ Nilsson, Nils (1995). "Eye on the Prize". AI Magazine. 16: 2.
7. ^ Hayes-Roth, Frederick; Waterman, Donald; Lenat, Douglas (1983). Building Expert Systems.
Addison-Wesley. ISBN 978-0-201-10686-2.
8. ^ Marvin Minsky, A Framework for Representing Knowledge, MIT-AI Laboratory Memo
306, June, 1974
9. ^ Mettrey, William (1987). "An Assessment of Tools for Building Large Knowledge-Based
Systems". AI Magazine. 8 (4). Archived from the original on 2013-11-10. Retrieved 2013-12-
24.
10. ^ Brachman, Ron (1978). "A Structural Paradigm for Representing Knowledge" (PDF). Bolt,
Beranek, and Neumann Technical Report (3605). Archived (PDF) from the original on April 30,
2020.
11. ^ MacGregor, Robert (June 1991). "Using a description classifier to enhance knowledge
representation". IEEE Expert. 6 (3): 41–46. doi:10.1109/64.87683. S2CID 29575443.
12. ^ McCarthy, J., and Hayes, P. J. 1969. Some philosophical problems from the
standpoint of artificial intelligence at the Wayback Machine (archived August 25, 2013).
In Meltzer, B., and Michie, D., eds., Machine Intelligence 4. Edinburgh: Edinburgh
University Press. 463–502.
13. ^ Lenat, Doug; R. V. Guha (January 1990). Building Large Knowledge-Based Systems:
Representation and Inference in the Cyc Project. Addison-Wesley. ISBN 978-0201517521.
14. ^ Smith, Brian C. (1985). "Prologue to Reflections and Semantics in a Procedural
Language". In Ronald Brachman and Hector J. Levesque (ed.). Readings in Knowledge
Representation. Morgan Kaufmann. pp. 31–40. ISBN 978-0-934613-01-9.
15. ^ Jump up to:a b Berners-Lee, Tim; Hendler, James; Lassila, Ora (May 17, 2001). "The
Semantic Web – A new form of Web content that is meaningful to computers will
unleash a revolution of new possibilities". Scientific American. 284 (5): 34–
43. doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0501-34. Archived from the original on April 24, 2013.
16. ^ Jump up to:a b Knublauch, Holger; Oberle, Daniel; Tetlow, Phil; Wallace, Evan (2006-03-
09). "A Semantic Web Primer for Object-Oriented Software
Developers". W3C. Archived from the original on 2018-01-06. Retrieved 2008-07-30.
17. ^ Hayes-Roth, Frederick; Waterman, Donald; Lenat, Douglas (1983). Building Expert Systems.
Addison-Wesley. pp. 6–7. ISBN 978-0-201-10686-2.
18. ^ Levesque, H.J. and Brachman, R.J., 1987. Expressiveness and tractability in
knowledge representation and reasoning 1. Computational intelligence, 3(1), pp.78-93.
19. ^ Levesque, Hector; Brachman, Ronald (1985). "A Fundamental Tradeoff in Knowledge
Representation and Reasoning". In Ronald Brachman and Hector J. Levesque (ed.). Readings
in Knowledge Representation. Morgan Kaufmann. p. 49. ISBN 978-0-934613-01-9. The good
news in reducing KR service to theorem proving is that we now have a very clear, very specific
notion of what the KR system should do; the bad new is that it is also clear that the services can
not be provided... deciding whether or not a sentence in FOL is a theorem... is unsolvable.
20. ^ Russell, Stuart J.; Norvig, Peter. (2021). Artificial Intelligence: A Modern
Approach (4th ed.). Hoboken: Pearson. p. 282. ISBN 978-0134610993. LCCN 20190474.
21. ^ Jump up to:a b c d e f g h i j k Davis, Randall; Shrobe, Howard; Szolovits, Peter (Spring
1993). "What Is a Knowledge Representation?". AI Magazine. 14 (1): 17–33. Archived from
the original on 2012-04-06. Retrieved 2011-03-23.
22. ^ Macgregor, Robert (August 13, 1999). "Retrospective on Loom". [Link]. Information
Sciences Institute. Archived from the original on 25 October 2013. Retrieved 10
December 2013.
23. ^ Brachman, Ron (1985). "Introduction". In Ronald Brachman and Hector J. Levesque
(ed.). Readings in Knowledge Representation. Morgan Kaufmann. pp. XVI–XVII. ISBN 978-
0-934613-01-9.
24. ^ Bih, Joseph (2006). "Paradigm Shift: An Introduction to Fuzzy Logic" (PDF). IEEE
Potentials. 25: 6–
21. doi:10.1109/MP.2006.1635021. S2CID 15451765. Archived (PDF) from the original on
12 June 2014. Retrieved 24 December 2013.
 25. ^ Zlatarva, Nellie (1992). "Truth Maintenance Systems and their Application for Verifying Expert
System Knowledge Bases". Artificial Intelligence Review. 6: 67–
110. doi:10.1007/bf00155580. S2CID 24696160.
26. ^ Levesque, Hector; Brachman, Ronald (1985). "A Fundamental Tradeoff in Knowledge
Representation and Reasoning". In Ronald Brachman and Hector J. Levesque (ed.). Readings
in Knowledge Representation. Morgan Kaufmann. pp. 41–70. ISBN 978-0-934613-01-9.
27. ^ Russell, Stuart J.; Norvig, Peter (2010), Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach (3rd
ed.), Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, ISBN 0-13-604259-7, p. 437-439
28. ^ Hayes P, Naive physics I: Ontology for liquids. University of Essex report, 1978, Essex,
UK.
29. ^ Davis R, Shrobe H E, Representing Structure and Behavior of Digital Hardware, IEEE
Computer, Special Issue on Knowledge Representation, 16(10):75-82.
Further reading
 Ronald J. Brachman; What IS-A is and isn't. An Analysis of Taxonomic Links in Semantic
Networks; IEEE Computer, 16 (10); October 1983
 Ronald J. Brachman, Hector J. Levesque Knowledge Representation and Reasoning,
Morgan Kaufmann, 2004 ISBN 978-1-55860-932-7
 Ronald J. Brachman, Hector J. Levesque (eds) Readings in Knowledge Representation,
Morgan Kaufmann, 1985, ISBN 0-934613-01-X
 Chein, M., Mugnier, M.-L. (2009),Graph-based Knowledge Representation: Computational
Foundations of Conceptual Graphs, Springer, 2009,ISBN 978-1-84800-285-2.
 Randall Davis, Howard Shrobe, and Peter Szolovits; What Is a Knowledge
Representation? AI Magazine, 14(1):17-33,1993
 Ronald Fagin, Joseph Y. Halpern, Yoram Moses, Moshe Y. Vardi Reasoning About
Knowledge, MIT Press, 1995, ISBN 0-262-06162-7
 Jean-Luc Hainaut, Jean-Marc Hick, Vincent Englebert, Jean Henrard, Didier
Roland: Understanding Implementations of IS-A Relations. ER 1996: 42-57
 Hermann Helbig: Knowledge Representation and the Semantics of Natural Language,
Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York 2006
 Frank van Harmelen, Vladimir Lifschitz and Bruce Porter: Handbook of Knowledge
Representation 2007.
 Arthur B. Markman: Knowledge Representation Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1998
 John F. Sowa: Knowledge Representation: Logical, Philosophical, and Computational
Foundations. Brooks/Cole: New York, 2000
 Adrian Walker, Michael McCord, John F. Sowa, and Walter G. Wilson: Knowledge Systems
and Prolog, Second Edition, Addison-Wesley, 1990
 Mary-Anne Williams and Hans Rott: "Frontiers in Belief Revision, Kluwer", 2001.
External links
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Knowledge representation.

 What is a Knowledge Representation? by Randall Davis and others

 Introduction to Knowledge Modeling by Pejman Makhfi
 Introduction to Description Logics course by Enrico Franconi, Faculty of Computer Science,
Free University of Bolzano, Italy
 DATR Lexical knowledge representation language
 Loom Project Home Page
 Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning Incorporated
 Description Logic in Practice: A CLASSIC Application
 The Rule Markup Initiative
 Nelements KOS - a non-free 3d knowledge representation system
Logic:

Logic, at its core, is the systematic approach to structure and evaluate

arguments, drawing conclusions from given premises. In the field of
AI, logical reasoning becomes the guiding force - the engine that
powers a machine's ability to process information, make decisions,
and solve complex problems.
What are the roles of logic?
Logic plays a pivotal role in fostering effective communication by enabling us to
structure our thoughts, express ideas coherently, and construct persuasive arguments.
When we communicate logically, we present information in a well-organized manner,
support our claims with evidence, and anticipate counterarguments.
What are the three modern roles for logic in AI?

We consider three modern roles for logic in artificial intelligence, which are based on the
theory of tractable Boolean circuits: (1) logic as a basis for computation, (2) logic for
learning from a combination of data and knowledge, and (3) logic for reasoning about
the behavior of machine learning systems.
What is the main purpose of logic?
However, all academic disciplines employ logic: to evaluate evidence, to analyze
arguments, to explain ideas, and to connect evidence to arguments. One of the most
important uses of logic is in composing and evaluating arguments. The study of logic
divides into two main categories: formal and informal.
What is the main function of logic?

At the heart of digital circuits and computing, you'll find logic functions and gates. These
are the building blocks that enable devices to perform complex calculations and make
decisions. Understanding these basics is crucial for delving into more advanced topics
in computer science and electrical engineering.
What are the four types of logic?

The four main logic types are:

 Informal logic.
 Formal logic.
 Symbolic logic.
 Mathematical logic.
 What are the three importance of logic?
 Studying logic is something everybody should do. This includes both homeschool
students and parents. In short, there are three reasons why we should learn
logic: it encourages clear thinking, empowers us to be truly in the image of God,
and builds good character.
Why Study Logic? Learning Outcomes and Teaching Advice

When you think of studying logic, what comes to mind? Often, logic is one of those subjects —
perhaps along with Latin and philosophy — that many associate with an outdated model of
education or, if studied today, maybe even with a hint of pretension. As a homeschooling family,
is it really necessary for your child to learn logic?

We believe the answer is an emphatic, “Yes!” In this post, we’ll cover the many benefits of
learning logic — from developing critical thinking and decision-making skills to building good
character — as well as several pieces of advice for teaching your student logic in your home
school.

Formal vs. Informal Logic

Formal logic has been called ‘math with words.’” – Leigh Bortins, The Question

Before diving into three learning outcomes that answer why we should study logic, it’s important
to make a quick note on the term logic used in this post. Generally, the study of logic is
categorized into informal and formal logic. The type of logic we encourage families to study is
formal logic — often referred to as traditional logic — which deals with forms of reasoning. As
Classical Conversations founder, Leigh Bortins, describes in her book The Question, “Formal
logic has been called ‘math with words.’”

Why Study Logic? 3 Learning Outcomes of Formal Logic

Logic studies enable us to experience the world in richer, more meaningful ways; in short,
logic studies make us free.” – Leigh Bortins, The Question

Studying logic is something everybody should do. This includes both homeschool
students and parents. In short, there are three reasons why we should learn logic: it encourages
clear thinking, empowers us to be truly in the image of God, and builds good character.

1. Studying Logic Develops Critical Thinking Skills

Studying logic involves learning the skills of critical thinking. As you and your student
analyze sound reasoning through studying arguments, syllogisms, and fallacies, you’ll develop a
sort of “truth compass.” In other words, you’ll be able to apply these reasoning skills to
recognize truth from falsehood, whether that’s in an advertisement, a political campaign, a
persuasive speech, a news article, or a social media post.

These same critical thinking skills practiced in logic can also be applied to sound decision-
making, a skill every parent wants their child to develop. Finally, it’s important to study logic to
become an effective communicator. After all, logic is also the backbone necessary for crafting
compelling arguments in speech and writing that point others toward truth.

2. Studying Logic Empowers Us to be Truly in the Image of God

As Christians, the God we worship is a God of form. Just look in Genesis, Chapter 1. The
universe God created is the ultimate example of order, structure, and form.

Similarly, we too create forms, from math and science formulas to sentence forms to logical
arguments. By using forms to indicate order from disorder and truth from uncertainty, we
establish ourselves as made in the image of God.

3. Studying Logic Builds Good Character

For many parents and students, studying logic isn’t easy. Often, along with learning logic come
times of frustration and befuddlement. Still, the goal of learning logic is to become better
thinkers, which is a worthwhile end to strive toward no matter how strenuous the journey may
become. Following through with your study of logic will empower you and your student
with confidence in your abilities to learn something challenging and use critical thinking skills
to make sound judgments and arrive at the truth in other areas of life.

How to Teach Logic: 3 Pieces of Advice for the Homeschool

Parent
Logic trains the brain to think clearly about all subjects by ordering information into
usable form. This is a skill we all need to acquire.” – Leigh Bortins, The Question

Convinced why your student should learn logic? Although the learning outcomes of studying
logic are noble and inspiring, many parents struggle when it comes to actually teaching the
subject. With its forms, structure, and objectivity, logic can appear intimidating. Hopefully, these
three pieces of advice will help and encourage you to take on the worthy task of homeschooling
your child in logic!

1. Stay Persistent!

Although this may not be what you want to hear, all difficult subjects — logic included —
require persistence and hard work. Constantly remind yourself that the end goal of your student
learning logic is to equip them with the skills to think critically. So, be persistent in teaching
your student logic. In time, your student will learn to apply critical thinking skills to make good
decisions and to detect truth from falsehood in everyday situations and encounters. It’s worth
every difficult moment to see these fruits of your labor!

Times when homeschooling is hard are a natural part of this journey. Still, that doesn’t mean you
have to go at it alone. Find other homeschool parents whom you can rely on for support,
guidance, and advice in teaching your child logic, whether in your Classical Conversations local
community, a homeschool co-op, or elsewhere. Homeschooling in isolation is never a good idea!

2. Spend Time Learning the Basics of Logic

The road to becoming a skilled logician begins with an understanding of the grammar — or
foundational knowledge — of the subject. Make sure to spend time with your student repeating
the basics of logic over and over before moving on to complex problems and concepts.

What are these foundations of logic? Well, there are logic vocabulary terms and definitions to
commit to memory, like argument, syllogism, conclusion, major premise, minor premise,
and fallacy. In addition, you and your student should understand the principles of logic, or “how
logic works.” That is, spend time studying the basic rules and procedures associated with clear
thinking and reasoning.

Moving on to advanced exercises and ideas before establishing a firm foundation will only lead
to discouragement with this subject. For instance, don’t feel guilty if you have to spend several
more weeks studying the basics of logic. In the end, this actually might end up saving you time,
not to mention a good deal of frustration!

3. Apply Logic to Other Subjects

One of the tenets of classical education is the idea that all subjects are interconnected. Thus,
subjects shouldn’t be studied as if they are islands, unrelated to each other.

A great benefit of learning logic is that it trains students to think clearly in all subjects by helping
them organize, make connections, and draw conclusions about all types of information. So,
encourage your student to utilize what they are learning in their study of logic to understand why
Hester Prynne made the decisions she did in The Scarlett Letter or what events motivated
American colonialists to wage war against England in the American Revolution.

The truth is that the skills of logic are applicable to all areas of life, and not just if your student
goes on to study math or computer science in college. From literature and art to history and
science, logic can be used everywhere. Encouraging your student to use logical reasoning in their
other subjects will show them that logic is useful and an important skill to master.
The Beauty of Learning Formal Logic
Sure, learning and teaching formal logic can be intimidating. But still, there’s something equally
attractive about the study of logic. Arriving at objective truth, knowing that which can be known,
making good decisions — these are beautiful goals that make the study of logic well worth the
effort.

If you’re on the search for a homeschool logic curriculum, consider our Traditional Logic series
designed to make homeschooling logic doable with daily practice exercises to help your student
develop powerful critical thinking skills.

Not yet a Classical Conversations member and interested in our community-based approach to
homeschooling? We’d love to hear from you. To learn more about us, click here.
Knowledge Representation using Logic
The aim of this section is to show how logic can be used to form representations of
the world and how a process of inference can be used to derive new representations
about the world and how these can be used by an intelligent agent to deduce what to
do.

We require:

 A formal language to represent knowledge in a computer tractable form.

 Reasoning - Processes to manipulate this knowledge to deduce non-obvious
facts.

Why logic?

The challenge is to design a language which allows one to represent all the necessary
knowledge. We need to be able to make statements about the world such as describing
things - people, houses, theories etc; relations between things and properties of things.

Logic makes statements about the world which are true (or false) if the state of affairs
it represents is the case (or not the case). Compared to natural languages (expressive
but context sensitive) and programming languages (good for concrete data structures
but not expressive) logic combines the advantages of natural languages and formal
languages. Logic is:

 concise
 unambiguous
 context insensitive
 expressive
 effective for inferences

A logic is defined by the following:

1. Syntax - describes the possible configurations that constitute sentences.

2. Semantics - determines what facts in the world the sentences refer to i.e. the
interpretation. Each sentence makes a claim about the world.
3. Proof theory - set of rules for generating new sentences that are necessarily
true given that the old sentences are true. The relationship between sentences is
called entailment. The semantics link these sentences (representation) to facts
of the world. The proof can be used to determine new facts which follow from
the old.
We will consider two kinds of logic: propositional logic and first-order logic or
more precisely first-order predicate calculus. Propositional logic is of limited
expressiveness but is useful to introduce many of the concepts of logic's syntax,
semantics and inference procedures.

Propositional Logic

Propositional symbols are used to represent facts. Each symbol can mean what we want it to be.
Each fact can be either true or false.

Propositions are combined with logical connectives to generate sentences with more complex
meaning. The connectives arre:

AND

OR

NOT
=> implies
<=> mutual implication

The meaning (semantics) of the connectives is represented by truth tables. The following are the
truth tables for the connectives:

Expression Truth Table Electrical Equivalent

E F True False
E F True True False
False False False
E
E True False
False True
E F True False
E F True True True
False True False
E F True False
E =>F True True False -
False True True
NOTE(1):
E F <=> E => F .
NOTE(2): `False True' is a True sentence/assertion.

Implication

A sentence of the form:

E => F
is called an implication with premise (antecedent) E and conclusion (consequent) F.
Implications are also known as if-then statements or rules.

Its truth table does not quite fit our intuitive understanding of ``E implies F'' since propositional
logic does not require any relation of causation or relevance between E and F. It is better to think
of ``E F'' as saying: ``if E is true then I am claiming that F is true (otherwise I am making no
claim).

The following commutative, distributive, associative rules apply, as do De Morgan's theorems.

Commutative E F <=> F E
E F <=> F E
Distributive E (F G)<=> (E F) (E G)
E (F G)<=>(E F) (E G)
Associative E (F G) <=> (E F) G
E (F G) <=> (E F) G
De Morgan's C(E F )<=> E F
(E F )<=> E F
Negation ( E) <=> E

Logical Proofs

A sentence is valid or necessarily true if and only if it is true under all possible
interpretations in all possible worlds. If a sentence is valid, it is so by virtue of its
logical structure independent of what possible interpretations are like.

A sentence is satisfiable if and only if there is some interpretation in some world for
which it is true. A sentence that is not satisfiable is unsatisfiable.

Making Inferences
Reasoning and inference are generally used to describe any process by which
conclusions are reached. Inference is often of three types:

1. Abduction

Abduction is a process to generate explanations. It aims to give a hypothetical

explanation. It is only a plausible inference.

If there is an axiom E=>F and an axiom F, then E does NOT logically follow.
This is called Abduction and is not a sound rule of inference.

2. Induction

Hypothesises a general rule from observations.

3. Deduction or rational inference

These are inferences which are made by the sound rules of inference. This
means that the conclusion is true in all cases where the premise is true. These
rules preserve the truth.

Sound rules of inference

Looking at the truth tables you will easily see that the sound rules are:

1. Modus ponens (or implication-elimination)

From an implication and the premise of the implication you can infer the
conclusion.

If there is an axiom E F and an axiom E, then F follows logically.

2. Modus tolens

If there is an axiom E F and an axiom F, then E follows logically.

3. Resolution.

If there is an axiom E F and an axiom F G then E G follows logically.

In fact, resolution can subsume both modus ponens and modus tolens. It can
also be generalized so that there can be any number of disjuncts in either of the
two resolving expressions, including just one. (Note, disjunct are expressions
 connected by , conjuncts are those connected by .) The only requirement is that
one expression contains the negation of one disjunct from the other.

To verify soundness we can construct a truth-table with one line for each
possible model of the proposition symbols in the premise, and show that in all
models where the premise is true, the conclusion is also true.

Example of truth table for resolution:

A B C A B B C A C
F F F F T F
F F T F T T
F T F T F F
F T T T T T
T F F T T T
T F T T T T
T T F T F T
T T T T T T

Types of Logic in AI
In the intricate world of Artificial Intelligence (AI), logic serves as the foundational fabric
that weaves together the intricacies of decision-making and problem-solving. As we go
into the diverse landscape of artificial intelligence, exploring the various types of logic in
AI becomes crucial. From classical propositional logic to advanced Bayesian reasoning,
each type of logic contributes uniquely to the capabilities of AI systems. In this
comprehensive article, we navigate through the nuanced concepts of logic, enlightening
their significance in AI development.

Logic and Logical Reasoning

Logic, at its core, is the systematic approach to structure and evaluate arguments,
drawing conclusions from given premises. In the field of AI, logical reasoning becomes
the guiding force - the engine that powers a machine's ability to process information,
make decisions, and solve complex problems. Visualise an AI detective piecing together
clues to crack a case; this is logical reasoning in action.

In other words, logic serves as "the compass steering the ship of AI development". It
provides a robust framework for developers to define rules, constraints, and
relationships within a system. This structured approach is paramount, especially in
scenarios where clear decision paths are vital. Consider an autonomous vehicle relying
on logical reasoning to navigate through traffic, follow traffic rules, and make split-
second decisions ensuring passenger safety.

Types of Logic in AI
Like the human brain, there are also several different types of logic in AI. Let's take a
tour through a handful of these logical frameworks.

Propositional Logic
Propositional logic, often called 'sentential' or 'zeroth-order' logic, constitutes a
fundamental aspect of logical reasoning within the realm of AI. In its essence, this logic
type deals with propositions: statements that can be either true or false, offering a
simplistic binary framework for decision-making.

Now, envision an AI system assigned the task of optimising the performance of a

renewable energy system, such as a solar farm. In the context of propositional logic, the
AI could formulate propositions like "Sunlight intensity is above a certain threshold" or
"Wind speed is within the optimal range." These propositions become pivotal elements
in the AI's decision-making process, determining actions like adjusting solar panel
angles or regulating wind turbine output based on the assessed truth values.

First-Order Logic
First-order logic, an extension of propositional logic, introduces the notion of variables
and quantifiers, bringing a more nuanced layer of complexity to logical reasoning. In this
logical system, statements are not merely true or false; they involve objects, properties,
and relationships between them.
Consider an AI tasked with managing a complex network of renewable energy assets.
First-order logic enables the AI to express intricate relationships, such as "For every
solar panel, there exists a corresponding battery" or "If the wind speed exceeds a
certain threshold, decrease the rotational speed of all turbines." This level of
expressiveness allows the AI to model and comprehend the interconnected aspects of a
renewable energy system, facilitating more sophisticated decision-making and
optimisation strategies.

Fuzzy Logic
Fuzzy logic, departing from the binary nature of classical logic, acknowledges the
shades of grey in between true and false, allowing for a more nuanced representation of
uncertainty. In AI applications for renewable energy, fuzzy logic proves invaluable in
handling imprecise and fluctuating inputs, such as weather conditions.

Imagine an AI system responsible for managing a solar power plant. Instead of

categorising sunlight as either completely present or absent, fuzzy logic allows the AI to
assess various degrees of sunlight intensity. This flexibility empowers the AI to make
more nuanced decisions, like adjusting energy production in response to varying cloud
cover.

Fuzzy logic's ability to capture and process uncertainties enhances the adaptability of AI
systems in the dynamic context of renewable energy operations.

Modal Logic
Modal logic introduces modalities, or qualifiers, to classical logic to account for different
states of affairs or possibilities. Modalities are expressions that signify necessity,
possibility, belief, or time. In the realm of AI and renewable energy, modal logic finds
relevance in scenario planning and decision-making under different conditions.

Consider an AI system managing a wind farm. Modal logic allows the AI to reason about
various possibilities, such as different wind speeds, turbine states, and maintenance
scenarios. This nuanced approach, leveraging modalities, enables the AI to make
decisions that consider not only the current state but also potential future states,
contributing to improved forecasting and adaptive strategies.
 By incorporating modal logic, AI systems in renewable energy enhance their capacity to
anticipate and respond to a spectrum of operational scenarios.

Bayesian Logic
Bayesian logic, deeply rooted in probability theory, is a cornerstone in AI for decision-
making under uncertainty. It applies Baye's theorem to update probabilities as new
information emerges. In the context of renewable energy systems, Bayesian logic
proves invaluable for predictive maintenance.

Imagine an AI-driven solar farm management system. Bayesian logic allows the system
to continually refine its predictions about potential faults or performance issues based
on incoming data. For instance, if a solar panel shows a slight degradation in
performance, the system, leveraging Bayesian principles, can intelligently update the
probability of an impending failure. This dynamic adjustment enhances the precision of
maintenance schedules, ensuring timely interventions and optimising the overall
performance of the solar array.

By incorporating Bayesian logic, AI models in renewable energy seamlessly adapt to

evolving conditions, offering more reliable and efficient operations.

Logic in AI and everywhere

The journey through the logic of AI unveils a carefully chosen array of logical
frameworks, each meticulously tailored to address specific problem intricacies. From
basic binary decisions to handling uncertainties and probabilities, each type of logic
plays a unique role in enhancing the decision-making process of artificial intelligence.
So, the next time you marvel at the capabilities of an AI system, remember that beneath
the surface, a symphony of logical reasoning is orchestrating the wonders of artificial
intelligence.

What is logic in Artificial Intelligence?

In this article, we are going to learn about the logic which we mentioned
earlier in the knowledge representation of Artificial Intelligence-based agent. We
will discuss what logic means in terms of AI and what are the types of logic.
We will also study about why these are important while dealing with Artificial
Intelligence.
Submitted by Monika Sharma, on June 06, 2019

Logic in Artificial Intelligence

Logic, as per the definition of the Oxford dictionary, is "the reasoning
conducted or assessed according to strict principles and validity". In Artificial
Intelligence also, it carries somewhat the same meaning. Logic can be defined as
the proof or validation behind any reason provided. It is simply the ‘dialectics
behind reasoning’. It was important to include logic in Artificial Intelligence
because we want our agent (system) to think and act humanly, and for doing so,
it should be capable of taking any decision based on the current situation. If we
talk about normal human behavior, then a decision is made by choosing an
option from the various available options. There are reasons behind selecting or
rejecting an option. So, our artificial agent should also work in this manner.

While taking any decision, the agent must provide specific reasons based on
which the decision was taken. And this reasoning can be done by the agent only
if the agent has the capability of understanding the logic.

Types of logics in Artificial Intelligence

In artificial Intelligence, we deal with two types of logics:

1. Deductive logic
2. Inductive logic

1) Deductive logic
In deductive logic, the complete evidence is provided about the truth of the
conclusion made. Here, the agent uses specific and accurate premises that lead
to a specific conclusion. An example of this logic can be seen in an expert system
designed to suggest medicines to the patient. The agent gives the complete
proof about the medicines suggested by it, like the particular medicines are
suggested to a person because the person has so and so symptoms.

2) Inductive logic
In Inductive logic, the reasoning is done through a ‘bottom-up’ approach. What
this means is that the agent here takes specific information and then generalizes
it for the sake of complete understanding. An example of this can be seen in the
natural language processing by an agent in which it sums up the words according
to their category, i.e. verb, noun article, etc., and then infers the meaning of that
sentence.
 Table of Contents of Knowledge Representation

1. Logic

1.1 Historical Background 1

1.2 Representing Knowledge in Logic 11

1.3 Varieties of Logic 18

1.4 Names, Types, and Measures 29

1.5 Unity Amidst Diversity 39

2. Ontology

2.1 Ontological Categories 51

2.2 Philosophical Background 55

2.3 Top-Level Categories 67

2.4 Describing Physical Entities 78

2.5 Defining Abstractions 89

2.6 Sets, Collections, Types, and Categories 97

2.7 Space and Time 109

3. Knowledge Representations

3.1 Knowledge Engineering 132

3.2 Representing Structure in Frames 143

3.3 Rules and Data 156

3.4 Object-Oriented Systems 169

3.5 Natural Language Semantics 178

3.6 Levels of Representation 186

4. Processes

4.1 Times, Events, and Situations 206

4.2 Classification of Processes 213

4.3 Procedures, Processes, and Histories 217

4.4 Concurrent Processes 223

4.5 Computation 232

4.6 Constraint Satisfaction 239

4.7 Change 245

5. Purposes, Contexts, and Agents

5.1 Purpose 265

5.2 Syntax of Contexts 274

5.3 Semantics of Contexts 284

5.4 First-Order Reasoning in Contexts 297

5.5 Modal Reasoning in Contexts 307

5.6 Encapsulating Objects in Contexts 321

5.7 Agents 330

6. Knowledge Soup

6.1 Vagueness, Uncertainty, Randomness, and Ignorance 348

6.2 Limitations of Logic 356

6.3 Fuzzy Logic 364

6.4 Nonmonotonic Logic 373

6.5 Theories, Models, and the World 383

6.6 Semiotics 394

7. Knowledge Acquisition and Sharing

7.1 Sharing Ontologies 408

7.2 Conceptual Schema 417

7.3 Accommodating Multiple Paradigms 427

7.4 Relating Different Knowledge Representations 438

7.5 Language Patterns 445

7.6 Tools for Knowledge Acquisition 452

Appendix A: Summary of Notations

A.1 Predicate Calculus 467

A.2 Conceptual Graphs 476

A.3 Knowledge Interchange Format 489

Appendix B: Ontology Base

B.1 Principles of Ontology 492

B.2 Top-Level Categories 497

B.3 Role and Relation Types 502

B.4 Thematic Roles 506

B.5 Placement of the Thematic Roles 510

Appendix C: Extended Examples

C.1 Hotel Reservation System 513

C.2 Library Database 515

C.3 ACE Vocabulary 518

 C.4 Translating ACE to Logic 518

Answers to Selected Exercises

Bibliography

Name Index

Subject Index

For more information, see the index and the preface of the book.

Send comments to John F. Sowa.

The concept of unity in diversity is a way to describe a state of harmony and

unity between people who have different characteristics. It's a way to show
unity without uniformity and diversity without fragmentation.

Here are some ways unity in diversity can be applied:

 National integration
Unity in diversity is important for a country's peace and prosperity. It can help
to reduce hatred and increase contentment.
 Creative thinking
Recognizing and appreciating differences can create an inclusive
environment and help groups think creatively.
 Effective decision making
Unity in diversity can help to develop trust and connection between people,
which can lead to effective decision making.
 Solving social issues
Unity in diversity can help to find solutions to social issues, riots, and other
disturbances.
The idea of unity in diversity is ancient and has applications in many fields,
including ecology, cosmology, philosophy, religion, and politics.
Unity in Diversity is a concept that signifies unity among individuals
who have certain differences among them. These differences can be
on the basis of culture, language, ideology, religion, sect, class,
ethnicity, etc. Furthermore, the existence of this concept has been
since time immemorial.
What is the concept of unity amidst diversity?
Unity means integration. It is a social psychological condition. It connotes a sense of
one-ness, a sense of we-ness. It stands for the bonds, which hold the members of a
society together. Unity in diversity essentially means “unity without uniformity” and
“diversity without fragmentation”.
What is the unity in diversity declamation?
It gives us all a great sense of belonging. Our pride in the Indian nation brings us all,
with all our diversity, into a unity that binds us in a spirit of common brotherhood. This
sense of brotherhood is what gives our nation the strength to excel. And we value the
human heritage that we all share.
What is the main point of unity in diversity?

Unity in Diversity is a concept that signifies unity among individuals who have certain
differences among them. These differences can be on the basis of culture, language,
ideology, religion, sect, class, ethnicity, etc. Furthermore, the existence of this concept
has been since time immemorial.

Unity in diversity is used as an expression of harmony and unity between dissimilar individuals

or groups. It is a concept of "unity without uniformity and diversity without fragmentation"[1] that

shifts focus from unity based on a mere tolerance of physical, cultural, linguistic, social, religious,

political, ideological and/or psychological differences towards a more complex unity based on an

understanding that difference enriches human interactions. The idea and related phrase is very

old and dates back to ancient times in both Western and Eastern Old World cultures. It has

applications in many fields, including ecology,[1] cosmology, philosophy,[2] religion[3] and

Significance of Unity amidst diversity

Unity amidst diversity emphasizes the idea that, despite visible differences among various creations,
they all originate from the same essence. This concept is found in the Purana and signifies the ability
to recognize coherence and connection within diverse elements. It reflects a broader understanding in
Indian history, where embracing diversity leads to a unified perspective, highlighting the
interconnectedness of different aspects of life and culture.
Synonyms: Harmony, Solidarity, Inclusion, Pluralism
The below excerpts are indicatory and do represent direct quotations or translations. It is your responsibility
to fact check each reference.

Hindu concept of 'Unity amidst diversity'

Hinduism Books

In Hinduism, Unity amidst diversity signifies that, despite visible differences in forms and
beliefs, all beings originate from the same fundamental essence, emphasizing interconnectedness
and a shared spiritual identity among diverse creations.
Significance of Unity amidst diversity in Purana and Itihasa (epic history):

Purana Books

From: Yoga Vasistha [English], Volume 1-4

(1) The understanding that despite apparent differences, all creation stems from the same
essence. [1]

The Purana refers to Sanskrit literature preserving ancient India’s vast cultural history, including historical legends, religious ceremonies,
various arts and sciences. The eighteen mahapuranas total over 400,000 shlokas (metrical couplets) and date to at least several centuries
BCE.

The concept of Unity amidst diversity in local and regional sources

History Books

Unity amidst diversity emphasizes the importance of coherence among diverse elements,
highlighting how different individuals or groups can come together to form a harmonious whole,
enhancing collaboration, understanding, and mutual respect while celebrating differences.
Significance of Unity amidst diversity in India history and geography:

From: Triveni Journal

(1) The concept of finding coherence and connection within a variety of different elements. [2]