Logic: First Order Logic

Raffaella Bernardi
[email protected]
P.zza Domenicani 3, Room 2.28

Faculty of Computer Science, Free University of

Bolzano-Bozen

http://www.inf.unibz.it/~bernardi/Courses/Logic06

Contents First Last Prev Next J

 Contents
1 Equivalences I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1 Equivalences (II) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2 Normal Forms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.1 Conversion into CNF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.2 Exercise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.3 Why Normal Forms? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3 Tableau Calculus for PL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.1 Negation Normal Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4 Equivalences: FOL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5 The Prenex Normal Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.1 Exercise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
5.2 Tableau Calculus: FOL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
5.3 Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
6 Summary: exercises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
7 Key Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

Contents First Last Prev Next J

1. Equivalences I
How would you prove that the following equivalences hold?
Commutativity φ∨ψ ≡ ψ∨φ
φ∧ψ ≡ ψ∧φ
φ↔ψ ≡ ψ↔φ
Associativity (φ ∨ ψ) ∨ χ ≡ φ ∨ (ψ ∨ χ)
(φ ∧ ψ) ∧ χ ≡ φ ∧ (ψ ∧ χ)
Idempotence φ∨φ ≡ φ
φ∧φ ≡ φ
Absorption φ ∨ (φ ∧ ψ) ≡ φ
φ ∧ (φ ∨ ψ) ≡ φ
Distributivity φ ∧ (ψ ∨ χ) ≡ (φ ∧ ψ) ∨ (φ ∧ χ)
φ ∨ (ψ ∧ χ) ≡ (φ ∨ ψ) ∧ (φ ∨ χ)

Contents First Last Prev Next J

1.1. Equivalences (II)
Tautology φ∨> ≡ >
Unsatisfiability φ∧⊥ ≡ ⊥
Negation φ ∨ ¬φ ≡ >
φ ∧ ¬φ ≡ ⊥
Neutrality φ∧> ≡ φ
φ∨⊥ ≡ φ
Double Negation ¬¬φ ≡ φ
De Morgan ¬(φ ∨ ψ) ≡ ¬φ ∧ ¬ψ
¬(φ ∧ ψ) ≡ ¬φ ∨ ¬ψ

Implication φ → ψ ≡ ¬φ ∨ ψ

Contents First Last Prev Next J

2. Normal Forms
Conjunctive Normal Form (CNF) Vn Wm
conjunction of disjunctions of literals: i=1 ( j=1 li,j )
| {z }
clauses
E.g., (A∨¬B)∧(B∨¬C∨¬D)
Disjunctive Normal Form (DNF) Wn Vm
disjunction of conjunctions of literals: i=1 ( j=1 li,j )
| {z }
terms
E.g., (A∧B)∨(A∧¬C)∨(A∧¬D)∨(¬B∧¬C)∨(¬B∧¬D)

Literals are either atoms or negations of an atom.

Contents First Last Prev Next J

2.1. Conversion into CNF
How do we convert a formula into CNF?

1. Elimination of → and ↔ by means of:

• A ↔ B ≡ (A → B) ∧ (B → A),
• A → B ≡ ¬A ∨ B
2. push ¬ inwards by means of
(a) ¬(A ∧ B) ≡ ¬A ∨ ¬B (De Morgan)
(b) ¬(A ∨ B) ≡ ¬A ∧ ¬B (De Morgan)
(c) ¬¬A ≡ A (double negation)
3. use the distributive law A∨(B∧C) ≡ (A∨B)∧(A∨C) to effect the conversation
to CNF.

Contents First Last Prev Next J

2.2. Exercise
Convert the following formulas into CNF:

1. (P ∧ Q) ↔ (R → (P → ¬Q))
2. (¬P ∧ (¬Q → R)) ↔ S)

Contents First Last Prev Next J

2.3. Why Normal Forms?
• We can transform propositional formulas, in particular, we can construct their
CNF and DNF.
• DNF tells us something as to whether a formula is satisfiable. If all disjuncts
contain ⊥ or complementary literals, then no model exists. Otherwise, the
formula is satisfiable.
• CNF tells us something as to whether a formula is a tautology. If all clauses (=
conjuncts) contain > or complementary literals, then the formula is a tautology.
Otherwise, the formula is falsifiable.

But:

• the transformation into DNF or CNF is expensive (in time/space)

• it is only possible for finite sets of formulas

Contents First Last Prev Next J

3. Tableau Calculus for PL
Which rules do we need?
φ∧ψ If a model satisfies a conjunction,
φ then it also satisfies each of the
ψ conjuncts

If a model satisfies a disjunction,

φ∨ψ then it also satisfies one of the dis-
φ ψ juncts. It is a non-deterministic
rule, and it generates two alterna-
tive branches of the tableaux.

Contents First Last Prev Next J

3.1. Negation Normal Form
The given tableau calculus works only if the formula has been translated into Nega-
tion Normal Form, i.e., all the negations have been pushed inside.

Example: Build a tableau for:

¬(A ∨ (B ∧ ¬C))
Build a tableau for its CNF:
(¬A ∧ (¬B ∨ C))

Contents First Last Prev Next J

4. Equivalences: FOL

(∀x. φ) ∧ ψ ≡ ∀x. (φ ∧ ψ) if x not free in ψ

(∀x. φ) ∨ ψ ≡ ∀x. (φ ∨ ψ) if x not free in ψ
(∃x. φ) ∧ ψ ≡ ∃x. (φ ∧ ψ) if x not free in ψ
(∃x. φ) ∨ ψ ≡ ∃x. (φ ∨ ψ) if x not free in ψ
∀x. φ ∧ ∀x. ψ ≡ ∀x. (φ ∧ ψ)
∃x. φ ∨ ∃x. ψ ≡ ∃x. (φ ∨ ψ)

¬∀x. φ ≡ ∃x. ¬φ
¬∃x. φ ≡ ∀x. ¬φ
& propositional equivalences

Contents First Last Prev Next J

5. The Prenex Normal Form
Quantifier prefix + (quantifier free) matrix

∀x1 ∀x2 ∃x3 . . . ∀xn φ

1. Elimination of → and ↔ by means of:

• A ↔ B ≡ (A → B) ∧ (B → A),
• (A → B ≡ ¬A ∨ B)
2. push ¬ inwards by means of
• ¬(A ∧ B) ≡ ¬A ∨ ¬B (De Morgan)
• ¬(A ∨ B) ≡ ¬A ∧ ¬B (De Morgan)
• ¬¬A ≡ A (double negation)
• ¬∀xA(x) ≡ ∃x¬A(x)
• ¬∃xA(x) ≡ ∀x¬A(x)

Contents First Last Prev Next J

 3. rename bound variables, if necessary
4. pull quantifiers outwards
5. use the distributive law A∨(B∧C) ≡ (A∨B)∧(A∨C) to effect the conversation
to CNF.

Renaming of variables. Let φ[x/t] be the formula φ where all occurrences of x have
been replaced by the term t.

Contents First Last Prev Next J

5.1. Exercise
Convert the following formulas into prenex normal forms:

• (∃x.A(x)) → (∀x.B(x))
• ∀x(∀y(∀z(A(x, y, z) ∧ B(y)) → (∀x.C(x, z))))
• ∀x∀y(A(x, y, z) ∧ ∃uC(x, u)) → ∃vC(x, v))
• ∃x(S(x) ∧ ∀y(L(y) → A(x, y)))

Contents First Last Prev Next J

5.2. Tableau Calculus: FOL
The completion rules for quantified formulas:

∀x. φ If a model satisfies a universal quantified formula, the it also

φ{X/t} satisfies the formula where the quantified variable has been
∀x. φ substituted with some term. The prescription is to use all the
terms which appear in the tableaux.

∃x. φ If a model satisfies an existential quantified formula, then it

φ{X/a} also satisfies the formula where the quantified variable has
been substituted with a fresh new Skolem term.

Contents First Last Prev Next J

5.3. Example
The above set of completion rules work only if the formula has been translated into
Negation Normal Form, i.e., all the negations have been pushed inside.

Build a tableau for the following formula:

¬(∃x. (∀y. (P (x) → Q(y))))
Build a tableau for its prenex normal form:
∀x. (∃y. (P (x) ∧ ¬Q(y)))

Contents First Last Prev Next J

6. Summary: exercises
Take the result of the conversion of the formulas below and check by means of the
tableau calculus whether they are satisfiable

1. (P ∧ Q) ↔ (R → (P → ¬Q))
2. (¬P ∧ (¬Q → R)) → S)
3. ∀x∀y((A(x, y, z) ∧ ∃uC(x, u)) → ∃vC(x, v))
4. ∃x(S(x) ∧ ∀y(L(y) → A(x, y)))

Contents First Last Prev Next J

7. Key Concepts
• Interpretation, Model, Domain
• Satisfiability, etc..
• Truth tables
• Tableaux

In the mid-term there will be exercises about:

1. Entailment KB |= φ in PL to be proved or refuted by means of truth tables.

2. Formalization of a simple argument in PL, and its solution by means of truth
tables or tableaux
3. Evaluation of a given FOL formula in a domain/interpretation.
4. Entailment KB |= φ in FOL to be proved by means of tableaux

Send us questions/doubts by the Wednesday 13rd (20:00), we will discuss them in

class on the 15th 08:30-09:30 before the mid-term (09:30-11:30).

Contents First Last Prev Next J