1
Chapter 8
First Order Logic
CS 461 – Artificial Intelligence
Pinar Duygulu
Bilkent University, Spring 2008
Slides are mostly adapted from AIMA and MIT Open Courseware
CS461 Artificial Intelligence © Pinar Duygulu Spring 2008
2
Pros and cons of propositional logic
Propositional logic is declarative
Propositional logic allows partial/disjunctive/negated
information
– (unlike most data structures and databases)
Propositional logic is compositional:
– meaning of B1,1 ∧ P1,2 is derived from meaning of B1,1 and of P1,2
Meaning in propositional logic is context-independent
– (unlike natural language, where meaning depends on context)
Propositional logic has very limited expressive power
– (unlike natural language)
– E.g., cannot say "pits cause breezes in adjacent squares“
• except by writing one sentence for each square
3
First Order Logic
4
FOL Motivation
5
First-order logic
• Whereas propositional logic assumes the world
contains facts,
• first-order logic (like natural language) assumes the
world contains
– Objects: people, houses, numbers, colors, baseball games,
wars, …
– Relations: red, round, prime, brother of, bigger than, part
of, comes between, …
– Functions: father of, best friend, one more than, plus,
• (relations in which there is only one value for a given input)
6
Syntax of FOL: Basic elements
• Constants : KingJohn, 2, ...
• Predicates: Brother, >,...
• Functions : Sqrt, LeftLegOf,...
• Variables x, y, a, b,...
• Connectives ¬, ⇒, ∧, ∨, ⇔
• Equality =
• Quantifiers ∀, ∃
7
FOL Syntax
8
Atomic sentences
Atomic sentence = predicate (term1,...,termn)
or term1 = term2
Term = function (term1,...,termn)
or constant
or variable
• E.g., Brother(KingJohn,RichardTheLionheart)
• > (Length(LeftLegOf(Richard)), Length(LeftLegOf(KingJohn)))
9
Complex sentences
• Complex sentences are made from atomic sentences
using connectives
¬S, S1 ∧ S2, S1 ∨ S2, S1 ⇒ S2, S1 ⇔ S2,
E.g. Sibling(KingJohn,Richard) ⇒
Sibling(Richard,KingJohn)
>(1,2) ∨ ≤ (1,2)
>(1,2) ∧ ¬ >(1,2)
10
Truth in first-order logic
• Sentences are true with respect to a model and an interpretation
• Model contains objects (domain elements) and relations among them
• Interpretation specifies referents for
constant symbols → objects
predicate symbols → relations
function symbols → functional relations
• An atomic sentence predicate(term1,...,termn) is true
iff the objects referred to by term1,...,termn
are in the relation referred to by predicate
11
Models for FOL: Example
12
FOL Interpretations
13
Holds
14
Semantic of Quantifiers
15
Example Domain
16
Example Domain
17
Example Domain
18
Example Domain
19
Writing FOL
There is somebody who is loved by everybody
20
Writing FOL
21
Universal quantification
∀ <variables> <sentence>
All Kings are persons:
∀x King(x) ⇒ Person(x)
∀x P is true in a model m iff P is true with x being each possible
object in the model
• Roughly speaking, equivalent to the conjunction of
instantiations of P
Richard the Lionheart is a king ⇒ Richard the Lionheart is a person
∧ King John is a king ⇒ King John is a person
∧ Richard’s left leg is a king ⇒ Richard’s left leg is a person
∧ John’s left leg is a king ⇒ John’s left leg is a person
∧ The crown is a king ⇒ The crown is a person
22
A common mistake to avoid
• Typically, ⇒ is the main connective with ∀
• Common mistake: using ∧ as the main connective
with ∀:
∀x King(x) ∧ Person(x)
means “Everyone is a king and everyone is a person”
23
Existential quantification
∃<variables> <sentence>
• ∃x Crown(x) ∧ OnHead(x,John)
∃x P is true in a model m iff P is true with x being some possible object
in the model
• Roughly speaking, equivalent to the disjunction of instantiations of P
The crown is a crown ∧ the crown is on John’s head
∨ Richard the Lionheart is a crown ∧ Richard the Lionheart is on John’s head
∨ King John is a crown ∧ King John is on John’s head
∨ ∨ ...
24
Another common mistake to avoid
• Typically, ∧ is the main connective with ∃
• Common mistake: using ⇒ as the main connective
with ∃:
∃x Crown(x) ⇒ OnHead(x,John)
is true even if there is anything which is not a crown
25
Properties of quantifiers
∀x ∀y is the same as ∀y ∀x
∃x ∃y is the same as ∃y ∃x
∃x ∀y is not the same as ∀y ∃x
∃x ∀y Loves(x,y)
– “There is a person who loves everyone in the world”
∀y ∃x Loves(x,y)
– “Everyone in the world is loved by at least one person”
• Quantifier duality: each can be expressed using the other
∀x Likes(x,IceCream) = ¬∃x ¬Likes(x,IceCream)
∃x Likes(x,Broccoli) = ¬∀x ¬Likes(x,Broccoli)
26
Equality
• term1 = term2 is true under a given interpretation if
and only if term1 and term2 refer to the same object
• E.g., definition of Sibling in terms of Parent:
∀x,y Sibling(x,y) ⇔ [¬(x = y) ∧ ∃m,f ¬ (m = f) ∧
Parent(m,x) ∧ Parent(f,x) ∧ Parent(m,y) ∧ Parent(f,y)]
27
Using FOL
The kinship domain:
• Brothers are siblings
∀x,y Brother(x,y) ⇔ Sibling(x,y)
• One's mother is one's female parent
∀m,c Mother(c) = m ⇔ (Female(m) ∧ Parent(m,c))
• “Sibling” is symmetric
∀x,y Sibling(x,y) ⇔ Sibling(y,x)
28
Using FOL
The set domain:
∀s Set(s) ⇔ (s = {} ) ∨ (∃x,s2 Set(s2) ∧ s = {x|s2})
¬∃x,s {x|s} = {}
∀x,s x ∈ s ⇔ s = {x|s}
∀x,s x ∈ s ⇔ [ ∃y,s2} (s = {y|s2} ∧ (x = y ∨ x ∈ s2))]
∀s1,s2 s1 ⊆ s2 ⇔ (∀x x ∈ s1 ⇒ x ∈ s2)
∀s1,s2 (s1 = s2) ⇔ (s1 ⊆ s2 ∧ s2 ⊆ s1)
∀x,s1,s2 x ∈ (s1 ∩ s2) ⇔ (x ∈ s1 ∧ x ∈ s2)
∀x,s1,s2 x ∈ (s1 ∪ s2) ⇔ (x ∈ s1 ∨ x ∈ s2)
