1 / 39

74.406 Natural Language Processing - Formal Logic -

74.406 Natural Language Processing - Formal Logic -. Propositional Calculus/Logic (PropLog) First-Order Predicate Logic/Calculus (FOL or FOPL) Formal Language (Syntax of formulae; wff) Inference System Semantics through Interpretation Function. Formal Language.

kele
Télécharger la présentation

74.406 Natural Language Processing - Formal Logic -

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. 74.406 Natural Language Processing- Formal Logic - • Propositional Calculus/Logic (PropLog) • First-Order Predicate Logic/Calculus (FOL or FOPL) • Formal Language (Syntax of formulae; wff) • Inference System • Semantics through Interpretation Function

  2. Formal Language A Formal Language is specified as L = (NT, T, P, S) NT Set of Non-Terminal Symbols T Set of Terminal Symbols P Set of Production or Grammar Rules S Start Symbol (top-level node in syntax tree / parse tree) A formal language specifies the syntactically correct or well-formed expressions of a language.

  3. Propositional Calculus

  4. Propositional Logic (PL) • Propositional Logic: • symbols for facts, statements (propositions) • logical connectives AND, OR, NOT, ,  • "Rules" – condition, consequence; implications • Example:“Dog Mood” • tongue_out  thirsty • growl OR bark  angry • ears_back AND tail_in  anxious

  5. Propositional Logic - Syntax • Propositional Logic (Symbols, Terminals): • propositionalsymbolsP, p, Q, q, r, ... • logical connectives,, ,,  • brackets( , ) • Inductive Definition of well-formed formulae (wff): • Propositional symbols P, Q, ... are wffs. • If P is a wff, then also  (P). • If P and Q are formulae then also • (P  Q); (P  Q); (P  Q); (P  Q)

  6. Propositional Logic - Semantics • assign truth values to atomic formulae (propositions) • determine truth values for complex formulae (composed from basic propositions using connectives) Truth table

  7. Propositional Logic – Example • Example:“Dog Moods” • tongue_out  thirsty • growl OR bark  angry • ears_back AND tail_in  anxious • Exercise:Set-up a truth-table for“Dog Moods” • Write in the left-side columns the observable propositional symbols (growl, bark,...) and in the right columns the derived propositions (anxious,...).

  8. Example, Exercise – Truth table • Example: “Dog Moods” • tongue_out  thirsty • growl OR bark  angry • ears_back AND tail_in  anxious

  9. Example – Truth tablefor Example: If I win the lottery, every CS420 student gets $1.000. I win the lotteryevery CS420 student gets $1.000

  10. First-Order Predicate Logic Syntax and Semantics

  11. Syntax of FOPL - Example • PredicateSymbols P, Q, married, ... • Function Symbols f, g, father-of, ... • Variables x, y, z, ... • Constants Sally, John, block-1, c, ... • Connectives, , , ,  • Quantifiers ,  • Terms x, Sally, father-of (Sally) • Sentencesmarried (Sally, John), P (c) • (atomic, complex)x: married (Sally, x), • x y: P (x, y)  Q (x)  R (y)

  12. FOPL as Formal Language: Symbols • NT Non-Terminals • Formula, atomic- Formula, complex- Formula, Term, Connective, Quantifier, Predicate, Function, Variable, Constant • T Terminals • Predicate Symbols P, Q, married, ..., T, F • Function Symbols f, g, father-of, ... • Variables x, y, z, ... • Constants Sally, block-1, c • (Binary) Connectives , , ,  • Negation Symbol  • (Unary Connective) • Quantifiers ,  • Equality Symbol = • Other Symbols ( , ) ,:

  13. FOPL as Formal Language - Rules 1 Non-terminal Rules Formula ::= complex-Formula | atomic-Formula |T|F atomic-Formula ::= Predicate (Term, ...)| Term = Term complex-Formula ::= Formula Connective Formula | (Quantifier Variable)* ...:Formula | Formula | (Formula) Term ::= Function (Term, ...) | Variable | Constant Terminal Rules Connective ::=  |  |  |  Quantifier ::=  |  Note: The Notation ... in the rules above indicates a list, e.g. a sequence of Quantifier-Variable combinations, or of Terms.

  14. FOPL as Formal Language - Rules 2 • General Production Rules • Formula ::= complex-Formula | atomic-Formula |T|F • complex-Formula ::= Formula Connective Formula |Quantifier Variable ...:Formula |Formula | (Formula) • atomic-Formula ::= Predicate (Term, ...)| Term = Term • Term ::= Function (Term, ...) | Variable | Constant • Connective ::=  |  |  |  • Quantifier ::=  |  • Domain Specific Production Rules • Predicate ::= brothers(_,_) |sisters(_,_)|is-mother-of(_,_)| ... • Function ::= gender(_)|age(_)| ... • Variable ::= x|y | • Constant ::= Sally | John | Bill| Mary

  15. Notes on FOPL Syntax The term well-formed formula (wff) is often used. equivalent to the term ‘sentence’. wffs are sentences if all their variables are bound by quantifiers. bound variablex: married (Sally, x) open formula: a variable in the formula is not bound, it is free x: married (Sally, x)  happy (y) closed formula: all variables in the formula are bound xy: married (x, y)  happy (x)  happy (y) scope of a quantifier: all occurrences of quantified variables in formulae until over-ruled by new quantifier

  16. Equivalence of Formulae x: (x)  x: (x) x: (x)  x: (x) x: (x)  y: (y)

  17. Predicate Logic - Semantics An Interpretation function determines the semantics of Predicate Logic formulae. Based on a “Domain” or “Universe” which models “the world”, consists of a set of Individuals (Objects, Constants) with Relations (Roles, Relations, Predicates) among them and Functions (Features, Attributes, Functions). An Interpretation assigns values to terms and formulae: Terms constants, variables, function-expressions Formulae predicate expressions, formulae connected logical connectives, quantified formulae

  18. FOPL: Semantics 1 • Define the Semantics of FOPL: • Interpretation – Mapping of symbols of the formal language (predicates, functions, variables, constants) onto the modeled domain (formal: Domain, relational Structure, or Universe) • Valuation - Determine the bindings of variables • Constructive Semantics – Determine the semantics of complex expressions inductively based on the definition of the semantics of basic expressions • Note:Simpler definitions of semantics exist without explicit Valuation function or explicit notation of the interpretation of predicates, functions, constants, and variables in the domain.

  19. FOPL: Semantics 2 Interpretation constants I(c)  D (0-ary function) predicates I(P)  Dn for P n-ary predicate functions I(f)  Dn →D for f n-ary function variables I(x)  D(see valuation) ------------------------------------------------------------------- determine constructively based on syntax and above Interpretation: term I(t) D sentence I(α) {T,F}

  20. FOPL: Semantics 3 Interpretation term I(f(t1,...,tn)) = I(f)(I(t1),...,I(tn))D atomic sentence I(P(t1,...,tn)) = T if (I(t1),...,I(tn))I(P) complex sentence I(α) = T if I(α)=F  |  |  I(α β) = T if I(α)=T and I(β)=T I(α β) = T if I(α)=T or I(β)=T I(α β) = T if I(α)=F or I(β)=T  |  I(x: α(x)) = T if I(α(x))=T for at least one dI(x) I(x: α(x)) = T if I(α(x))=T for all dI(x)

  21. FOPL: Semantics 3b Formulae with multiple / nested quantifiers: Evaluate / Interpret formula from left to right / from outside to inside. I(x: α(x)) = T if I(α(x))=T for at least one dI(x) I(x: α(x)) = T if I(α(x))=T for all dI(x) Easier: Substitute x with constant cC, and later use I(c) instead of I(x). Task: Interpret the following formulae: xy: P(x,y) y x: P(x,y) What is the difference between them?

  22. FOPL: Semantics 4 Interpretation of open formulae and Satisfiability Regard complex sentence α with (free) variable x: α(x) choose valuation function and determine satisfiability: valuation function V: V(x) = d D α(x) satisfiable if there is a valuation V with wrt I,V V(x)=d such that I(α(d))=T α(x) true / validif for every valuation V with wrt I V(x)=d, dD I(α(d))=T

  23. FOPL: Semantics 5 Model: Given a set of formulae and a structure D with an Interpretation I, and a valuation V, then D is a model of iff I() = Tfor all

  24. FOPL: Semantics 6 Semantic-based consequence: Given a set of formulae and a formulaα, and an Interpretation I into a Structure D, we say that αis a logical consequence of iff if I() = T for all then I(α) = T Notation: |=α

  25. FOPL: Inference System • Inference in FOPL: • Derive new formulae by syntactic manipulation of existing formulae (through applying inference rules): • given a set of formulae  • apply inference rule (based on  ) • new formula αis derived; αis a Theorem of . • add new formula to . • The set of valid formulae is now α. • Notation:  |– α • α is inferred or derived from .

  26. FOPL: Axioms The start-set for inferences in FOPL are the axioms of FOPL. Axioms describe the general features of a logic, and are always assumed to be valid formulae in this logic.

  27. FOPL Axioms A1      A2      A3        A4 (  )  ((  )  (  )) A5 x: (x)  (y) A6 (x)  y: (y) based on Frost (1986)

  28. Inference Rules – Modus Ponens Modus Ponens:   ,   States that  can be concluded provided we know that the formulae    and  are true in our knowledge base.

  29. Inference Rule UGUniversal Generalization Universal Generalization: (x) x: (x) where (x) is a formula containing the free variable x.

  30. Inference Rules - Universal Quantifier Introduction Introducing the Universal Quantifier:   (x) x: (x) (x) is a formula containing the free variable x, which is bound in the conclusion by the universal quantifier.

  31. Inference Rules - Existential Quantifier Introduction Introducing the Existential Quantifier: (x)   x: (x) (x) is a formula containing the free variable x, which is bound in the conclusion by the existential quantifier.

  32. Inference Rules - UI Universal Instantiation: x: (x) (c) where (x) is any formula containing the quantified variable x, and (c) is the same as formula (x) but every occurrence of the variable x is substituted with the arbitrary constant c.

  33. Inference Rules - EG Existential Generalization: (c) x: (x) where (c) is a formula containing the arbitrary constant c but not an unbound occurrence of x, and (x) is the same formula as (c) but with every occurrence of the constant c replaced by a variable x. (If x occurs unbound in , use other variable-name.)

  34. IR Replacement Rules Replacement Rules                (  ) (  )   

  35. FOPL: Semantics and Inference In First-Order Predicate Logic, there is a correspondence(regarding the truth status) between formulae derived through logical Inferenceand their semantic Interpretation. In other words: Any formula derived by inference* is true if and only if it is true in the semantic interpretation. Notation:  |– αiff  |= α * in a sound and complete inference system

  36. Inference Systems - Soundness and Completeness Soundness An Inference System is sound iff if  |– αthen |= α Every formula which is derived by formal inference, is semantically true. Completeness An Inference System is complete iff if  |= αthen |– α Every formula which is semantically true can be derived by formal inference.

  37. Semantics - Example Predicate Logic Language constants Bill-1, John-3, Sally-1, Mary-1, Mary-2 predicates happy-together, hate-each-other Structure D objects: Uncle-Bill, Uncle-John, Aunt-Sally, The-woman-I-don't-like, Mary relations: Married, Divorced (Uncle-Bill, Aunt-Sally)  Married, (Uncle-John, Mary)  Married (or: {(Uncle-Bill, Aunt-Sally), (Uncle-John, Mary)}=Married (Uncle-John, The-woman-I-don't-like)  Divorced Interpretation I(Bill-1)=Uncle-Bill, I(John-3)=Uncle-John, I(Sally-1)=Aunt-Sally, I(Mary-1)=The-woman-I-don't-like, I(Mary-2)=Mary I(happy-together)=Married, I(hate-each-other)=Divorced True or false? hate-each-other (Bill-1, John-3) happy-together(Bill-1, Sally-1) hate-each-other(John-3, Mary-1) happy-together(John-3, Mary-2)

  38. Semantics and Inference -Example Structure D objects: Uncle-Bill, Uncle-John, Aunt-Sally, The-woman-I-don't-like, Mary relations: Married, Divorced (Uncle-John, The-woman-I-don't-like)  Divorced (Uncle-Bill, Aunt-Sally)  Married, (Uncle-John, Mary)  Married (or: {(Uncle-Bill, Aunt-Sally), (Uncle-John, Mary)} = Married) Interpretation I I(Bill-1) = Uncle-Bill, I(John-3) = Uncle-John, I(Sally-1) = Aunt-Sally, I(Mary-1) = The-woman-I-don't-like, I(Mary-2) = Mary I(happy-together) = Married, I(hate-each-other) = Divorced True or false? hate-each-other (Bill-1, John-3) hate-each-other (John-3, Mary-1) happy-together (Bill-1, Sally-1)  happy-together (John-3, Mary-2) x: happy-together(Uncle-Bill, x)) x,y,z: happy-together(x,y)  hate-each-other (x,z) What if you want to add a formula? x,y: happy-together(x,y)  happy-together(y,x)

  39. Additional References • Frost, Richard: Introduction to Knowledge Base Systems. Collins Professional and Technical Books, William Collins Sons & Co. Ltd, London, 1986. • Nilsson, Nils J.: Artificial Intelligence - A new synthesis. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Francisco, CA, 1998.

More Related