Subject:problem Solving Method Unit-4 Resolution Refutation Systems:production System For Resolution Refutations

Subject :problem solving method
Unit- 4
Resolution refutation
systems:production system for
resolution refutations
Name:k.Ramesh
Roll No:20001D5309
MTECH-Artificial Intelligence
CONTENT
 What is Resolution ?
 What is Refutation
 Resolution refutation systems
 Production system for resolution refutations
Resolution
 Resolution is a valid inference rule producing a new
clause implied by two clauses containing
complementary literals
Literal: atomic symbol or its negation, i.e., P, ~P
 Amazingly, this is the only interference rule needed
to build a sound & complete theorem prover
_Based on proof by contradiction, usually called
resolution refutation
 The resolution rule was discovered by
Alan Robinson (CS, U. of Syracuse) in the mid
1960s
Resolution
 A KB is a set of sentences all of which are true, i.e., a
conjunction of sentences
 To use resolution, put KB into
conjunctive normal form (CNF)
 Each sentence is a disjunction of one or more literals
(positive or negative atoms)
 Every KB can be put into CNF, by rewriting its

sentences using standard tautologies, e.g.:
 P  Q ≡ ~P  Q
 P  (Q  R) ≡ (P  Q)  (P  R) ≡ (P  Q) , (P  R)
Tautologies
Resolution  (AB) ↔ (~A 
Example B)
 (A (B  C)) ↔
•KB: [PQ , QRS] (AB)(AC)
•KB: [PQ , QR, QS ]

•KB in CNF: [~PQ , ~QR , ~QS]
•Resolve KB[0] and KB[1] producing:
~PR (i.e., PR)
•Resolve KB[0] and KB[2] producing:
~PS (i.e., PS)
•New KB: [~PQ , ~QR, ~QS, ~PR, ~PS]
Proving it’s raining with rules
 A proof is a sequence of sentences, where each is a
premise (i.e., a given) or is derived from earlier sentences
in the proof by an inference rule
 Last sentence is the theorem (also called goal or query)
that we want to prove
 The weather problem using traditional reasoning
1 Hu premise “It's humid”
2 HuHo premise “If it's humid, it's hot”
3 Ho modus ponens(1,2) “It's hot”
4 (HoHu)R premise “If it's hot & humid, it's raining”
5 HoHu and introduction(1,3) “It's hot and humid”
6R modus ponens(4,5) “It's raining”
Proving it’s raining with resolution
Hu ∧ Ho => R
Hu => Ho ~(Hu ∧ Ho) ∨ R
Hu
~Hu ∨ Ho ~Hu ∨ ~Ho ∨ R
Hu
Hu ~Hu∨Ho
~Hu∨Ho ~Hu∨~Ho∨R
~Hu∨~Ho∨R
Ho
Ho
Hu => R
~Hu∨R
~Hu∨R
RR Resolution proof of R
A simple proof procedure
This procedure generates new sentences in a KB

1. Convert all sentences in the KB to CNF1
2. Find all pairs of sentences with complementary literals2 that have
not yet been resolved
3. If there are no pairs stop else resolve each pair, adding the result
to the KB and go to 2
 Is it sound?, complete? always terminate?
 1: a KB in conjunctive 2: a literal is a variable or its negation

normal form is a set of
disjunctive sentences
Propositional Resolution
 It is sound!
 It’s not generatively complete in that it can’t derive all
clauses that follow from the KB
 The issues are not serious limitations, though
 Example: if the KB includes P and includes Q we won’t
derive P ^ Q
 It will always terminate
 But generating all clauses that follow can take a long time
and many may be useless
Refutation
 When resolution is used to prove inconsistency, it is called

refutation. (refute=disprove)
 The above binary tree, showing resolution and resulting in

the empty clause, is called a refutation tree.
Refutation proofs
 Common use case: we have a question/goal (e.g, P) and
want to know if it’s true
 A refutation proof is a common approach:
 We start with a KB with all true facts
 Add negation of what we want to prove to KB (e.g.,
~P)
 Try to find a contradiction
 If proof ever produces one, it must be due to adding
~P, so goal is proven
 Procedure easy to focus & control, so is tends to be more
efficient
Resolution refutation
Procedure tries to prove a goal P
1. Add negation of goal to the KB, ~P
2. Convert all sentences in KB to CNF
3. Find pairs of sentences with complementary literals that
have not yet been resolved
4. If there are no pairs stop else resolve each pair, adding the
result to the KB and go to 2
 If we get an empty clause (i.e., a contradiction) then P
follows from the KB
 e.g., resolving X with ~X results in an empty clause
 If not, conclusion can’t be proved from the KB
Proving it’s raining with refutation
resolution
Hu ∧ Ho => R
negation Hu => Ho ~(Hu ∧ Ho) ∨ R
Hu ~Hu ∨ Ho
of goal ~Hu ∨ ~Ho ∨ R
~R
~R Hu
Hu ~Hu∨Ho
~Hu∨Ho ~Hu∨~Ho∨R
~Hu∨~Ho∨R
Ho
Ho
Hu => R
~Hu∨R
~Hu∨R
RR
Resolution refutation proof of R

Linear Refutation
 We can resolve with different clauses and keep adding new clauses
forever!
 To prevent this, Linear Refutation always starts with a goal (as the
example showed previously).
 Prolog s’ computation rule:
Always selects the leftmost subgoal, although logically there is no order
for the subgoals.
Example: When resolving G1: :‐ parent(Z ,Y1) , newborn(Y1)., parent(..)
was selected to resolve upon.
Prolog also starts from the top of knowledge base and goes down the list of
facts and rules.
Search Space
 Based on linear refutation and Prolog’s computation rule, we know the search tree
of Prolog.
 Search tree: The root in the search tree is the main goal G0. A child node is a new
goal Gi obtained through resolution. A link is labelled with the clause resolved with
and the substitution.
 Example:
C0: grandfather(X,Z) :‐ father(X,Y), parent(Y,Z).
C1: parent(X,Y) :‐father(X,Y).
C2: parent(X,Y) :‐ mother(X,Y).
C3: father(a,b):‐.
C4: mother(b,c):‐.
C5: mother(b,d):‐.
G0: ‐ grandfather(a,X).
Search Space (example)
Search Space
Reference Books
 1. GorgeBoole (1847) introduced the first comprehensive
and workable system of for mal logic in his book The
Mathematical Analysis of logic.
 2.Stephen Cook (1971) showed that deciding satisfiability of
a sentence in propositional logic is NP-complete.
 3. The wumpus world was invented by Gregory Yob (1975).
 The WALKSAT algorithm described in the chapter is due to
Selman et al. (1996).
Thank You

Subject:problem Solving Method Unit-4 Resolution Refutation Systems:production System For Resolution Refutations

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Subject:problem Solving Method Unit-4 Resolution Refutation Systems:production System For Resolution Refutations

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Subject:problem Solving Method Unit-4 Resolution Refutation Systems:production System For Resolution Refutations

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Subject :problem solving method

 Every KB can be put into CNF, by rewriting its

•KB: [PQ , QR, QS ]

This procedure generates new sentences in a KB

 Is it sound?, complete? always terminate?

 1: a KB in conjunctive 2: a literal is a variable or its negation

 When resolution is used to prove inconsistency, it is called

 The above binary tree, showing resolution and resulting in

Resolution refutation proof of R

You might also like

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.