Scribd
Upload
81 views25 pages

Predicate Calculus: Conversion To Normal Form

The document describes the steps to convert a first-order logic formula to clause normal form: 1) Eliminate redundant quantifiers and introduce existential quantifiers for unhandled variables 2) Rename variables quantified more than once 3) Eliminate implications 4) Move negations inward 5) Push quantifiers to the right 6) Eliminate existential quantifiers through Skolemization 7) Move universal quantifiers left 8) Distribute conjunction over disjunction 9) Optionally simplify

Uploaded by

Archana Panwar
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
81 views25 pages

Predicate Calculus: Conversion To Normal Form

The document describes the steps to convert a first-order logic formula to clause normal form: 1) Eliminate redundant quantifiers and introduce existential quantifiers for unhandled variables 2) Rename variables quantified more than once 3) Eliminate implications 4) Move negations inward 5) Push quantifiers to the right 6) Eliminate existential quantifiers through Skolemization 7) Move universal quantifiers left 8) Distribute conjunction over disjunction 9) Optionally simplify

Uploaded by

Archana Panwar
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 25

Predicate Calculus

Conversion to Normal Form


Inference Rules
 Universal elimination:
x Likes( x, IceCream) with the substitution {x / Einstein} gives us
Likes(Einstein, IceCream)
The substitution has to be done by a ground term
 Existential elimination: (Skolemization)
From x Likes( x, IceCream) we may infer Likes(Man, IceCrea) as
long as Man does not appear elsewhere in the Knowledge base
 Existential introduction:
From Likes( Monalisa , IceCream) we can infer
x Likes( x, IceCream )
Basic Steps
 Convert the set of rules and facts into clause form
(conjunction of clauses/disjunction of clauses)
 Insert the negation of the goal as another clause

 Use resolution to deduce a refutation

If a refutation is obtained, then the goal can be


deduced from the set of facts and rules.
Conversion to Normal Form
 A formula is said to be in clause form if it is of the form:
x1 x2…… xn[C1C2  …… Ck]
 All first order logic formulas can be converted to clause
form
 We shall demonstrate the conversion on the formula:
x {p(x) z { ¬y [q(x,y) p(f(x1)] y
[q(x,y)p(x)] }}
Conversion to Normal Form
 Step1:Take the existential closure and eliminate redundant
quantifiers. This introduces x1 and eliminates and z, so:
x {p(x) z { ¬y [q(x,y) p(f(x1)] y
[q(x,y)p(x)] }}

x1 x {p(x)  { ¬y [q(x,y)  p(f(x1)] y [q(x,y)


 p(x)] }}
Conversion to Normal Form
 Step2 : Rename any variable that is quantified more than
once. y has been quantified twice, so:
x1 x {p(x)  { ¬y [q(x,y)  p(f(x1)] y [q(x,y) 
p(x)] }}

x1 x {p(x)  { ¬y [q(x,y)  p(f(x1)] z [q(x,z)


p(x)] }}
Conversion to Normal Form
 Step3 : Eliminate Implication.
x1 x {p(x)  { ¬y [q(x,y)  p(f(x1))] z
[q(x,z) p(x)] }}

x1 x {¬p(x)  {¬y [¬q(x,y)  p(f(x1))] z


[¬ q(x,z)  p(x)] }}
Conversion to Clausal Form
 Step4 : Move the negation all the way inwards
x1 x {¬p(x)  {¬y [¬q(x,y)  p(f(x1))] z
[¬ q(x,z)  p(x)] }}

x1 x {¬p(x)  { y [q(x,y)  ¬p(f(x1))]  z


[¬q(x,z)  p(x)] }}
Conversion to Clausal Form
 Step5 : Push the quantifiers to the right
x1 x {¬p(x)  { y [q(x,y)  ¬p(f(x1))] z [¬q(x,z)
 p(x)] }}

x1 x{¬p(x)  {[y q(x,y)  ¬p(f(x1))]  [z¬q(x,z)


 p(x)] }}
Conversion to Normal Form
 Step6 : Eliminate Existential Quantifiers
(Solemnization)
 Pick out the left most yB(y) and replace it with
B(f(xi1,xi2,xi3….. xin)) where:
1. xi1,xi2,xi3….. xin are all the free variables of yB(y) that are
universally quantified to the left of yB(y) and,
 f is any n-ary function constant which does not occur
already
Conversion to Normal Form
 Skolemization
x1 x{¬p(x)  {[y q(x,y)  ¬p(f(x1))] 
[z¬q(x,z)  p(x)] }}

x {¬p(x)  {[q(x,g(x))  ¬p((f(a))]  [z¬q(x,z)


 p(x)] }}
Conversion to Normal Form
 Step7 : Move all universal quantifiers to the left
x {¬p(x)  {[q(x,g(x))  ¬p((f(a))]  [z¬q(x,z)
 p(x)] }}

x z {¬p(x)  {[q(x,g(x))  ¬p((f(a))] 


[¬q(x,z)  p(x)] }}
Conversion to Normal Form
 Step8 : Distribute  over 
x z {¬p(x)  {[q(x,g(x))  ¬p((f(a))]  [¬q(x,z) 
p(x)] }}

x z {[¬p(x)  q(x,g(x))] 
[¬p(x)  ¬p((f(a))] 
[¬p(x)  ¬q(x,z)  p(x)] }
Conversion to Normal Form
 Step9 : Simplify (Optional)
x z {[¬p(x)  q(x,g(x))] 
[¬p(x)  ¬p((f(a))] 
[¬p(x)  ¬q(x,z)  p(x)] }

x z {[¬p(x)  q(x,g(x))] 
[¬p(x)  ¬p((f(a))] 
[¬q(x,z)] }
Summarize
 Step1:Take the existential closure and eliminate redundant quantifiers and
introduce existential closure to unhandled variables.
 Step2: Rename any variable that is quantified more than once.
 Step3: Eliminate Implication.
 Step4: Move the negation all the way inwards.
 Step5: Push the quantifiers to the right.
 Step6: Eliminate Existential Quantifiers (Solemnization)
 Step7: Move all universal quantifiers to the left.
 Step8: Distribute  over 
 Step9: Simplify (Optional)
Exercise
 x y z Gaul(x)  Potion(y) 
Hostile(z)  Sells(x,y,z)  Criminal(x)
 x y married(x,y)  member(x)  member(y)
 x y z y a father(x,z)  father(z,y) 
grandfather(x,y)
 x z bird(x)  fly(x)
Step1:eliminate redundant introduce existential to
unhandled variables

 xyz Gaul(x)  Potion(y) 


Hostile(z)  Sells(x,y,z)  Criminal(x)
 x y married(x,y)  member(x)  member(y)
 x z father(x,z)  yfather(z,y) 
grandfather(x,y)
 x bird(x)  fly(x)
Step2: Rename any variable that is quantified more
than once

 x y z Gaul(x)  Potion(y) 
Hostile(z)  Sells(x,y,z)  Criminal(x)
 x y married(x,y)  member(x)  member(y)
 x y z father(x,z)  father(z,y) 
grandfather(x,y)
 x bird(x)  fly(x)
Step3: Eliminate Implication
 x y z {{Gaul(x)  Potion(y) 
Hostile(z)  Sells(x,y,z)}  Criminal(x)}
 x y { {married(x,y)  member(x)}  member(y)}

 x y z { {father(x,z)  father(z,y)} 

grandfather(x,y)}
 x { bird(x)  fly(x)}
Step4: Move the negation all the way inwards
 x y z {Gaul(x)  Potion(y) 
Hostile(z)  Sells(x,y,z)  Criminal(x)}
 x y {married(x,y)  member(x)  member(y)}

 x y z {father(x,z)  father(z,y) 

grandfather(x,y)}
 x {bird(x)  fly(x)}
Step5: Push the quantifiers to the right
 x y z {Gaul(x)  Potion(y) 
Hostile(z)  Sells(x,y,z)  Criminal(x)}
 x y {married(x,y)  member(x)  member(y)}

 x y z {father(x,z)  father(z,y) 

grandfather(x,y)}
 x {bird(x)  fly(x)}
Step6: Eliminate Existential
Quantifiers
 x y z {Gaul(x)  Potion(y) 
Hostile(z)  Sells(x,y,z)  Criminal(x)}
 x {married(x,f(x))  member(x)  member(y)}

 x y {father(x,(g(x))  father((g(x),y) 

grandfather(x,y)}
 bird(M)  fly(M)
Step7: Move all universal quantifiers to the left
 x y z {Gaul(x)  Potion(y) 
Hostile(z)  Sells(x,y,z)  Criminal(x)}
 x {married(x,f(x))  member(x)  member(y)}

 x y {father(x,(g(x))  father((g(x),y) 

grandfather(x,y)}
 bird(M)  fly(M)
Step8: Distribute  over 
 x y z {Gaul(x)  Potion(y) 
Hostile(z)  Sells(x,y,z)  Criminal(x)}
 x {married(x,f(x))  member(x)  member(y)}

 x y {father(x,(g(x))  father((g(x),y) 

grandfather(x,y)}
 bird(M)  fly(M)
Step9: Simplify (Optional)
 x y z {Gaul(x)  Potion(y) 
Hostile(z)  Sells(x,y,z)  Criminal(x)}
 x {married(x,f(x))  member(x)  member(y)}

 x y {father(x,(g(x))  father((g(x),y) 

grandfather(x,y)}
 bird(M)  fly(M)

You might also like