Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Where is Wumpus Propositional logic (cont…) Reasoning where is wumpus

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Where is Wumpus Propositional logic (cont…) Reasoning where is wumpus"— Presentation transcript:

1 Where is Wumpus Propositional logic (cont…) Reasoning where is wumpus
鬼はどこですか? Propositional logic (cont…)    命題論理 Reasoning where is wumpus  鬼がいる場所を推理する

2 limination introduction negation resolution complex atomic conjunction disjunction time-dependent

3 elimination 削除 introduction 導入 negation 否定 resolution 解決 atomic 原子の referent 指示物 conjunction 連結 disjunction 分離 dependent 従属関係の

4 命題論理: 意味論 論理積 A∧B AかつB 論理和 A∨B AまたはB 否定 ¬A Aでない 含意 A⇒B AならばBを意味する
同等 A⇔B (AならばB)かつ(BならばA) S1 S2 S1 S2 S1 is true, then S2 is true. S1 is false, then S2 is either true or false S1 is true, then S2 is true. S1 is false, then S2 is false S1 S2 S1  S2 white  false white  false

5 then B is either true or false
This relation between sentences is called entailment. A |= B This relation between sentences is called implication. A  B AならばB」(A→B)は、Aが真ならばBが真のときだけ真、Aが偽ならばBの真偽にかかわらず真となります。 A is true, then B is true. A is false, then B is either true or false

6 課題:真偽値の計算 p = T, q = F, r = Tのとき (p  q)  r p = T, q = F, r = Fのとき
p = F, q = F, r = Tのとき (p  q)  r p = F, q = F, r = Fのとき (p  q)  r  これは論理式の意味(真偽値)の計算例である.

7 Seven inference rules for propositional Logic
Modus Ponens And-Elimination And-Introduction Or-Introduction Double-Negation Elimination Unit Resolution Logic connectives:   ,  i 1  2 … n 1  2 … n 1, 2, …, n 1  2  …  n i      ,   (α または β , not β ) → α    ,     (α または β , not β または γ ) →  α または γ である   

8 The knowledge base p p A p Percept sentences:
there is no smell in the square [1,1]  S1,1 there is no breeze in the square [1,1]  B1,1 there is no smell in the square [2,1]  S2,1 there is breeze in the square [2,1]   B2,1 there is smell in the square [1,2]  S1,2 there is no breeze in the square [1,2]  B1,2 s s b b p w g p A p

9 The knowledge base p p A p knowledge sentences: w g
If a square has no smell, then neither the square nor any of its adjacent squares can house a wumpus. R1: S1,1  W1,1  W1,2  W2,1 R2: S2,1  W1,1  W2,1  W2,2  W3,1 If there is smell in [1,2], then there must be a wumpus in [1,2] or in one or more of the neighboring squares. R3: S1,2  W1,3  W1,2  W2,2  W1,1 If a square has no breeze, then neither the square nor any of its adjacent squares can have a pit. R4: B1,1  P1,1  P1,2  P2,1 R5: B1,2  P1,1  P1,2 P2,2  P1,3 If there is breeze in [2,1], then there must be a pit in [2,1] or in one or more of the neighboring squares. R6: B2,1  P3,1  P2,1  P2,2  P1,1 s s b b p w g p A p

10 Inferring knowledge using propositional logic
Concerning with the 6 squares, [1,1], [2,1], [1,2], [3,1], [2,2], [1,3], there are 12 symbols, S1,1, S2,1, S1,2, B1,1, B2,1, B1,2, W1,1, W1,2, W2,1, W2,2, W3,1, W1,3 The process of finding a wumpus in [1,3] as follows: 1. Apply R1 to S1,1, we obtain W1,1  W1,2  W2,1 2. Apply And-Elimination, we obtain W1,1 W1,2 W2,1 3. Apply R2 and And-Elimination to S2,1, we obtain W1,1  W2,2 W2,1 W3,1 4. Apply R3 and the unit resolution to S1,2, we obtain ( is W1,3W1,2 W2,2 and  is W1,1 ) W1,3  W1,2  W2,2 5. Apply the unit resolution again, we obtain ( is W1,3 W1,2 and  is W2,2 ) W1,3  W1,2 6. Apply the unit resolution again, we obtain ( is W1,3 and  is W1,2 ) W1,3 Here is the answer: the wumpus is in [1,3], that is, W1,3 is true. i 1  2 … n   ,   R4: S1,2  W1,3  W1,2  W2,2  W1,1 s s b b p w g p A p

11 Problem with propositional logic
Too many propositions  too many rules to define a competent agent The world is changing, propositions are changing with time.  do not know how many time-dependent propositions we will need have to go back and rewrite time-dependent version of each rule. The problem with proposition logic is that it only has one representational device: the proposition!!! The solutions to the problem is to introduce other logic first-order logic That can represent objects and relations between objects in addition to propositions.


Download ppt "Where is Wumpus Propositional logic (cont…) Reasoning where is wumpus"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google