Scribd
Upload
24 views7 pages

Class Test Answer Key: 1. Define Ontological Engineering

1. The document provides definitions and explanations of concepts related to knowledge representation and logic, including ontological engineering, forward and backward chaining, unification, Skolemization, and categories. 2. It also presents a resolution proof to demonstrate that "John likes peanuts" can be logically proven based on given statements about foods, eating habits, and categories. 3. The resolution proof proceeds by negating the conclusion, converting statements to clausal form, resolving clauses through substitution of variables, and ultimately deriving a contradiction.

Uploaded by

Karpagavadivu K
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
24 views7 pages

Class Test Answer Key: 1. Define Ontological Engineering

1. The document provides definitions and explanations of concepts related to knowledge representation and logic, including ontological engineering, forward and backward chaining, unification, Skolemization, and categories. 2. It also presents a resolution proof to demonstrate that "John likes peanuts" can be logically proven based on given statements about foods, eating habits, and categories. 3. The resolution proof proceeds by negating the conclusion, converting statements to clausal form, resolving clauses through substitution of variables, and ultimately deriving a contradiction.

Uploaded by

Karpagavadivu K
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 7

Class Test Answer Key

1. Define ontological engineering


How to create choice of representations, concentrating on general concepts-such
as Actions, Time, Physical Objects, and Beliefs-that occur in many different domains.
Representing these abstract concepts is sometimes called ontologic engineering-it is
related to the knowledge engineering process, but operates on a grander scale. The
prospect of representing everything in the world is daunting.
2. Differentiate forward and backward chaining.

3. Define Unification.
Lifted Inference rule require finding substitutions that make different logical expressions
look identical (same). This is called Unification.
4. What is Skolemization?
In mathematical logic, a formula of first-order logic is in Skolem normal form if it is in
prenex normal form with only universal first-order quantifiers. Every first- order formula may
be converted into Skolem normal form while not changing its satisfiability via a process
called Skolemization. Skolemization is the process of removing the existential quantifiers by
elimination.
5. Write about Categories.
Organization of objects into categories –Knowledge Representation
Much reasoning takes place at the level of categories
For example, a shopper would normally have the goal of buying a basketball, rather than a
particular basketball such as BB9.
Categories also serve to make predictions about objects once they are classified.
For example, from its green and yellow mottled skin, one-foot diameter, ovoid shape,
red flesh, black seeds, and presence in the fruit class, one can infer that an object is a
watermelon.
Categories serve to organize and simplify the knowledge base through inheritance.

Example: Food are edible, Fruit is a subclass of


Food and Apples is a subclass of Fruit, then we
can infer that every apple is edible.

Subclass relations organize categories into a


taxonomy, or taxonomic hierarchy
Two or more categories are disjoint if they
have no members in common.

Eg.Disjoint({Animals, Vegetables})

Exhaustive Decomposition - if each object of


the class must belong to at least one category

Eg.ExhaustiveDecomposition({Americans,
Canadians , Mexicans}, NorthAmericans)

A disjoint exhaustive decomposition is known


as a partition

Eg.Partition({Males,Females}, Animals)

a. John likes all kind of food.

b. Apple and vegetable are food

c. Anything anyone eats and not killed is food.

d. Anil eats peanuts and still alive

e. Harry eats everything that Anil eats.


Prove by resolution that:
f.

John likes peanuts.

Step-1: Conversion of Facts into FOL

In the first step we will convert all the given statements into its first order logic.

Step-2: Conversion of FOL into CNF

In First order logic resolution, it is required to convert the FOL into CNF as CNF form
makes easier for resolution proofs.

o Eliminate all implication (→) and rewrite

a. ∀x ¬ food(x) V likes(John, x)
b. food(Apple) Λ food(vegetables)

c. ∀x ∀y ¬ [eats(x, y) Λ ¬ killed(x)] V food(y)

d. eats (Anil, Peanuts) Λ alive(Anil)

e. ∀x ¬ eats(Anil, x) V eats(Harry, x)

f. ∀x¬ [¬ killed(x) ] V alive(x)

g. ∀x ¬ alive(x) V ¬ killed(x)

h. likes(John, Peanuts).

o Move negation (¬)inwards and rewrite

a. ∀x ¬ food(x) V likes(John, x)

b. food(Apple) Λ food(vegetables)

c. ∀x ∀y ¬ eats(x, y) V killed(x) V food(y)

d. eats (Anil, Peanuts) Λ alive(Anil)

e. ∀x ¬ eats(Anil, x) V eats(Harry, x)

f. ∀x ¬killed(x) ] V alive(x)

g. ∀x ¬ alive(x) V ¬ killed(x)

h. likes(John, Peanuts).

o Rename variables or standardize variables

a. ∀x ¬ food(x) V likes(John, x)

b. food(Apple) Λ food(vegetables)

c. ∀y ∀z ¬ eats(y, z) V killed(y) V food(z)

d. eats (Anil, Peanuts) Λ alive(Anil)


e. ∀w¬ eats(Anil, w) V eats(Harry, w)

f. ∀g ¬killed(g) ] V alive(g)

g. ∀k ¬ alive(k) V ¬ killed(k)

h. likes(John, Peanuts).

o Eliminate existential instantiation quantifier by elimination.


In this step, we will eliminate existential quantifier ∃, and this process is known
as Skolemization. But in this example problem since there is no existential
quantifier so all the statements will remain same in this step.
o Drop Universal quantifiers.
In this step we will drop all universal quantifier since all the statements are not
implicitly quantified so we don't need it.

a. ¬ food(x) V likes(John, x)

b. food(Apple)

c. food(vegetables)

d. ¬ eats(y, z) V killed(y) V food(z)

e. eats (Anil, Peanuts)

f. alive(Anil)

g. ¬ eats(Anil, w) V eats(Harry, w)

h. killed(g) V alive(g)

i. ¬ alive(k) V ¬ killed(k)

j. likes(John, Peanuts).

o Distribute conjunction ∧ over disjunction ¬.


This step will not make any change in this problem.

Step-3: Negate the statement to be proved


In this statement, we will apply negation to the conclusion statements, which will be
written as ¬likes(John, Peanuts)

Step-4: Draw Resolution graph:

Now in this step, we will solve the problem by resolution tree using substitution. For
the above problem, it will be given as follows:

Hence the negation of the conclusion has been proved as a complete contradiction
with the given set of statements.

Explanation of Resolution graph:


o In the first step of resolution graph, ¬likes(John, Peanuts) , and likes(John,
x) get resolved(canceled) by substitution of {Peanuts/x}, and we are left
with ¬ food(Peanuts)
o In the second step of the resolution graph, ¬ food(Peanuts) , and food(z) get
resolved (canceled) by substitution of { Peanuts/z}, and we are left with ¬
eats(y, Peanuts) V killed(y) .
o In the third step of the resolution graph, ¬ eats(y, Peanuts) and eats (Anil,
Peanuts) get resolved by substitution {Anil/y}, and we are left
with Killed(Anil) .
o In the fourth step of the resolution graph, Killed(Anil) and ¬ killed(k) get
resolve by substitution {Anil/k}, and we are left with ¬ alive(Anil) .
o In the last step of the resolution graph ¬ alive(Anil) and alive(Anil) get
resolved.

You might also like