UNIT-3

KNOWLEDGE REPRESENTATION
OUTLINE

• First Order Predicate Logic – Prolog Programming – Unification – Forward Chaining-

Backward Chaining – Resolution – Knowledge Representation - Ontological Engineering-
Categories and Objects – Events - Mental Events and Mental Objects - Reasoning
Systems for Categories - Reasoning with Default Information.
 2/26/2018

KNOWLEDGE……….

Knowledge is a collection of "facts" from some domain.

We need a representation of "facts" that can be manipulated by a program.
Normal English is insufficient, too hard currently for a computer program to
draw inferences in natural languages.
Thus some symbolic representation is necessary.
Therefore, we must be able to map "facts to symbols" and "symbols to
facts"
DATA….INFORMATION….KNOWLEDGE…WISDOM

By organizing or analyzing the data, we understand what the data means,

and this becomes information.
The interpretation or evaluation of information yield knowledge.
An understanding of the principles embodied within the knowledge is wisdom.
UNDERSTANDING……….
SYMBOLIC LOGIC
2/26/2018

• The facts are claims about the world that are True or False.
• Logic can be used to represent simple facts.
• To build a Logic-based representation :
◊ User defines a set of primitive symbols and the associated semantics.
◊ Logic defines ways of putting symbols together so that user can define
legal sentences in the language that represent TRUE facts.
◊ Logic defines ways of inferring new sentences from existing ones.
◊ Sentences - either TRUE or false but not both are called propositions.
PROPOSITIONAL LOGIC

◊ A declarative sentence expresses a statement with a proposition as

content; example:
the declarative "snow is white" expresses that snow is white;
further, "snow is white" expresses that snow is white is TRUE.
DEFINING PROPOSITION….
A proposition is a statement, which in English would be a declarative
sentence.
Every proposition is either TRUE or FALSE.

Examples: (a) The sky is blue., (b) Snow is cold. , (c) 12 * 12=144

‡ Propositions are "sentences" , either true or false but not both.

‡ A sentence is smallest unit in propositional logic.

‡ If proposition is true, then truth value is "true" .

If proposition is false, then truth value is "false" .
PROPOSITIONAL LOGIC…

Propositional logic is fundamental to all logic.

Propositional logic is also called Propositional calculus, Sentential

calculus, or Boolean algebra.
Propositional logic tells the ways of joining and/or modifying entire propositions, statements
or sentences to form more complicated propositions (compound proposition), statements
or sentences, as well as the logical relationships and properties that are derived from
the methods of combining or altering statements.
 MOVING ON TO PREDICATE LOGIC…..FOPL
The propositional logic, is not powerful enough for all types of
assertions;

Example : The assertion "x > 1", where x is a variable, is not a

proposition because it is neither true nor false unless value of x is defined.

Consider example :
" All men are mortal.
Socrates is a man.
Then Socrates is mortal" ,
These cannot be expressed in propositional logic as a finite and logically
valid argument (formula). 


We need languages : that allow us to describe properties


( predicates ) of
objects, or a relationship among objects represented by the variables .
Predicate logic satisfies the requirements of a language.
Predicate logic is powerful enough for expression and reasoning.
Predicate logic is built upon the ideas of propositional logic.
 FOPL………………
Predicate: Every complete "sentence" contains two parts : a "subject" and a "predicate".

The subject is what (or whom) the sentence is about.

The predicate tells something about the subject;

Example :
A sentence "Judy (runs)".

The subject is Judy and the predicate is runs .

Predicate, always includes verb, tells something about the subject.

Predicate is a verb phrase template that describes a property of objects, or a relation among objects
represented by the variables.
FOPL ………………

Example:

"The car Tom is driving is blue" ;

"The sky is blue" ;

"The cover of this book is blue"

Predicate is "is blue" , describes property.

Predicates are given names; Let 'B' is name for predicate "is_blue".

Sentence is represented as "B(x)" , read as "x is blue";

Symbol "x" represents an arbitrary Object .

FOPL…….OPERATIONS…

Propositional operators like &&, ||, !, <, > combine predicates.

Logic operators :
&& = AND= Conjunction
|| = OR = Disjunction

Consider the expression with the respective logic symbols || and &&

x < y || ( y < z && z < x)

Assigning values, 3, 2, 1 for x, y, z

Expression can be tested to yield true or false.
FOPL…………USING QUANTIFIERS
UNIVERSE OF DISCOURSE

Universe of Discourse is domain of discourse or universe.

It is a set of entities that the quantifiers deal.

--Entities can be set of real numbers, set of integers, sets of all cars on a
parking lot, the set of all students in class room etc.

--universe is thus the domain of individual variables

--propositions in the predicate logic are statements on objects of a

universe
FOPL….FORMULAE

An atomic formula (or simply atom) is a formula with no deeper propositional structure, i.e.,
a formula that contains no logical connectives or a formula that has no strict sub-formulas.

Atoms are thus the simplest well-formed formulas of the logic.

Compound formulas are formed by combining the atomic formulas using the logical
connectives.

Well-formed formula (“WFF") is a symbol or string of symbols (a formula) generated by the formal
grammar of a formal language.
FIRST-ORDER LOGIC

• Propositional logic assumes that the world contains facts.

• First-order logic (like natural language) assumes the world contains

• Objects: people, houses, numbers, colors, baseball games, wars, …

• Relations: red, round, prime, brother of, bigger than, part of, comes between, …

• Functions: father of, best friend, one more than, plus, …

OTHER LOGICS………….
SYNTAX OF FOPL: BASIC ELEMENTS

• Constant Symbols:
• Stand for objects
• e.g., KingJohn, 2, UCI,...

• Predicate Symbols
• Stand for relations
• E.g., Brother(Richard, John), greater_than(3,2)...

• Function Symbols
• Stand for functions
• E.g., Sqrt(3), LeftLegOf(John),...
SYNTAX OF FOL: BASIC ELEMENTS

• Constants KingJohn, 2, UCI,...

• Predicates Brother, >,...

• Functions Sqrt, LeftLegOf,...

• Variables x, y, a, b,...

• Connectives  (Negation), (Implication/Implies),  (Conjunction),  (disjunction), 

(equivalence)

• Equality =

• Quantifiers  (Universal / for all),

 (Existential / There exists /for some)
RELATIONS

• Some relations are properties: they state

some fact about a single object: Round(ball), Prime(7).

• n-ary relations state facts about two or more objects: Married(John,Mary),

LargerThan(3,2).

• Some relations are functions: their value is another object: Plus(2,3),

Father(Dan).
YOU MAY USE GRAPHICAL REPRESENTATIONS TO
BETTER UNDERSTAND
YOU MAY USE TABULAR REPRESENTATION
ALSO TO UNDERSTAND..

• A FOL model is basically equivalent to a relational database instance.

• Historically, the relational data model comes from FOL.
Student Course Professor
s-id Intelligence Ranking
c-id Rating Difficulty p-id Popularity Teaching-a
Jack 3 1
101 3 1 Oliver 3 1
Kim 2 1
Paul 1 2 102 2 2 Jim 2 1

Registration
RA
s-id c.id Grade Satisfaction
s-id p-id Salary Capability Jack 101 A 1
Jack Oliver High 3 Jack 102 B 2
Kim Oliver Low 1 Kim 102 A 1
Paul Jim Med 2 Paul 101 B 1
TERMS

• Term = logical expression that refers to an object.

• There are 2 kinds of terms:
• constant symbols: Table, Computer
• function symbols: LeftLeg(Pete), Sqrt(3), Plus(2,3) etc

• Functions can be nested:

• Pat_Grandfather(x) = father(father(x))

• Terms can contain variables.

• If No variables = ground term.
ATOMIC SENTENCES

• Atomic sentences state facts using terms and predicate symbols

• P(x,y) interpreted as “x is P of y”

• Examples:
LargerThan(2,3) is false.
Brother_of(Mary,Pete) is false.
Married(Father(Richard), Mother(John)) could be true or false
COMPLEX SENTENCES

• We make complex sentences with connectives (just like in propositional

logic).
property

Brother (LeftLeg (Richard ), John )  (Democrat (Bush ))

binary function
relation

objects

connectives
MORE EXAMPLES

• Brother(Richard, John)  Brother(John, Richard)

• King(Richard)  King(John)

• King(John) =>  King(Richard)

• LessThan(Plus(1,2) ,4)  GreaterThan(1,2)

USING VARIABLES

• Person(John) is true or false because we give it a single argument ‘John’

• We can be much more flexible if we allow variables which can take on values
in a domain. e.g., all persons x, all integers i, etc.
• E.g., can state rules like Person(x) => HasHead(x)
or Integer(i) => Integer(plus(i,1)
UNIVERSAL QUANTIFICATION 
•  means “for all”
• Allows us to make statements about all objects that have certain properties
• Can now state general rules:
 x King(x) => Person(x)

 x Person(x) => HasHead(x)

 i Integer(i) => Integer(plus(i,1))

Note that
 x King(x)  Person(x) is not correct!
This would imply that all objects x are Kings and are People
 x King(x) => Person(x) is the correct way to say
EXISTENTIAL QUANTIFICATION 
•  x means “there exists an x such that….” (at least one object x)
• Allows us to make statements about some object without naming it

• Examples:

 x King(x)

 x Lives_in(John, Castle(x))

i Integer(i)  GreaterThan(i,0)

Note that  is the natural connective to use with 

(And => is the natural connective to use with  )

COMBINING QUANTIFIERS

 x  y Loves(x,y)
• For everyone (“all x”) there is someone (“y”) that they love.

 y  x Loves(x,y)
- there is someone (“y”) who is loved by everyone

Clearer with parentheses:  y (  x Loves(x,y) )

DUALITY: CONNECTIONS BETWEEN QUANTIFIERS

• Asserting that all x have property P is the same as asserting

that there does not exist any x that does’t have the property
P

 x Likes(x, 271 class)   x  Likes(x, 271 class)

In effect:
-  is a conjunction over the universe of objects
-  is a disjunction over the universe of objects
Thus, DeMorgan’s rules can be applied
DE MORGAN’S LAW FOR QUANTIFIERS

De Morgan’s Rule Generalized De Morgan’s Rule

P  Q  (P  Q ) x P  x (P )
P  Q  (P  Q ) x P  x (P )
(P  Q )  P  Q x P  x (P )
(P  Q )  P  Q x P  x (P )

Rule is simple: if you bring a negation inside a disjunction or a conjunction,

always switch between them (or and, and  or).
USING FOL….(POSSIBLY DEMO WITH PROLOG…….)

• We want to TELL things to the KB, e.g.

TELL(KB, x , King (x )  Person (x ))
TELL(KB, King(John) )

These sentences are assertions

• We also want to ASK things to the KB,

ASK(KB, x , Person) (x )

these are queries or goals

The KB should output x where Person(x) is true.

KNOWLEDGE ENGINEERING IN FOL

1. Identify the task

2. Assemble the relevant knowledge
3. Decide on a vocabulary of predicates, functions, and constants
4. Encode general knowledge about the domain
5. Encode a description of the specific problem instance
6. Pose queries to the inference procedure and get answers
7. Debug the knowledge base.
SUMMARIZING……….

• First-order logic:
• Much more expressive than propositional logic
• Allows objects and relations as semantic primitives
• Universal and existential quantifiers
• syntax: constants, functions, predicates, equality,
quantifiers
• Knowledge engineering using FOL
• Capturing domain knowledge in logical form
CHAINING STRATEGIES……………
The search control strategies are of different types, and are realized
by some specific type of "Control Structures".

Strategies for search

Some widely used control strategies for search are stated below.
◊ Forward search : The control strategies for exploring search
proceeds forward from initial state (data) to wards a solution (goal);
the methods are called data-directed.
◊ Backward search : The control strategies for exploring search
proceeds backward from a goal or final state towards either a
solvable sub problem or the initial state (data);
the methods are called goal directed.
◊ Both forward and backward search : Here, the control strategies
for exploring search is a mixture of both forward and backward
strategies .
CHAINING…

 Chaining refers to sharing conditions between rules, so that the same

condition is evaluated once for all rules.
 When one or more conditions are shared between rules, they are
considered "chained."
 Chaining are of two types : Forward and Backward chaining.
 Forward chaining is called data-driven and
 Backward chaining is called query-driven.

◊ Activation of Rules
 The Forward chaining and Backward chaining are the two different
strategies for activation of rules in the system.
 Forward and Backward chaining are some techniques for drawing
inferences from Rule base.
FORWARD CHAINING…..

Forward chaining is a technique for drawing inferences from Rule

base.

Forward-chaining inference is often called data driven.

◊ The algorithm proceeds from a given situation to a desired goal,
adding new assertions (facts) found.
◊ A forward-chaining, system compares data in the working memory
against the conditions in the IF parts of the rules and determines
which rule to fire.
EXAMPLE………
Example : Forward Channing

■ Given : A Rule base contains following Rule set;

Rule 1: If A and C Then F

Rule 2: If A and E Then G

Rule 3: If B Then E

Rule 4: If G Then D
■ Problem : Prove that

If A and B true Then D is True

FORWARD CHAINING ALGORITHM…….

‡ Start with input given A, B is true and then

‡ start at Rule 1 and go forward / down till a rule
"fires'' is found.
First iteration :
‡ Rule 3 fires : conclusion E is true
‡ new knowledge found
‡ No other rule fires;
‡ end of first iteration.
‡ Goal not found;
‡ new knowledge found at (ii);
‡ go for second iteration

Second iteration :
‡ Rule 2 fires : conclusion G is true
‡ new knowledge found
‡ Rule 4 fires : conclusion D is true
‡ Goal found;
‡ Proved
BACKWARD CHAINING

Backward chaining is a technique for drawing inferences from Rule base.

Backward-chaining inference is often called goal driven.

◊ The algorithm proceeds from desired goal, adding new assertions (facts)
found.

◊ A backward-chaining, system looks for the action in the THEN

clause of the rules that matches the specified goal.
EXAMPLE…
Example : Backward Channing
◊ Given : Rule base contains following Rule set

Rule 1: If A and C Then F

Rule 2: If A and E Then G

Rule 3: If B Then E

Rule 4: If G Then D
◊ Problem : Prove
If A and B true Then D is true
BACKWARD

‡ Start with goal ie D is true

‡ go backward/up till a rule "fires'' is
found.
First iteration :
‡ Rule 4 fires :
‡ new sub goal to prove G is true
‡ go backward
‡ Rule 2 "fires''; conclusion: A is true
‡ new sub goal to prove E is true
‡ go backward;
‡ no other rule fires; end of first iteration.
‡ new sub goal found at (iii);
‡ go for second iteration
Second iteration :
‡ Rule 3 fires :
‡ conclusion B is true (2nd input found)
‡ both inputs A and B ascertained
‡ Proved
UNIFICATION

• Unification: The process of finding all legal substitutions that make logical expressions
look identical
UNIFICATION

• We can get the inference immediately if we can find a substitution θ such that King(x)
and Greedy(x) match King(John) and Greedy(y)
• θ = {x/John, y/John} works
• Unify(a,b) = θ if a θ = b θ
UNIFICATION
RESOLUTION…..

Resolution is a procedure used in proving that arguments which are

expressible in predicate logic are correct.
Resolution is a procedure that produces proofs by refutation or
contradiction.
Resolution lead to refute a theorem-proving technique for sentences in
propositional logic and first-order logic.
 Resolution is a rule of inference.
 Resolution is a computerized theorem prover.
 Resolution is so far only defined for Propositional Logic. The strategy is
that the Resolution techniques of Propositional logic be adopted in
Predicate Logic.
EXAMPLE……….
RESOLUTION BY REFUTATION……….
RESOLUTION THEOREM PROVING

• Convert everything to CNF (Conjunctive Normal Form)

• Resolve, with unification
• Save bindings as you go!

• If resolution is successful, proof succeeds

• If there was a variable in the item to prove, return variable’s value from unification
bindings

59
CONVERTING TO CNF

1. Replace implication (A  B) by A  B
2. Move  “inwards”
• x P(x) is equivalent to x P(x) & vice versa
3. Standardize variables
• x P(x)  x Q(x) becomes x P(x)  y Q(y)
4. Skolemize
• x P(x) becomes P(A)
5. Drop universal quantifiers
• Since all quantifiers are now , we don’t need them
6. Distributive Law

60
 CONVERT TO FOPL, THEN CNF

1. John likes all kinds of food

2. Apples are food.
3. Chicken is food.
4. Anything that anyone eats and isn’t killed by is food.
5. Bill eats peanuts and is still alive.
6. Sue eats everything Bill eats.

AI: Chapter 9: Inference in First-Order

March 14,
Logic
2006
61
 RESOLUTION EXAMPLE

• Steve only likes easy courses

• Science courses are hard
• All the courses in the basket weaving department are easy
• BK301 is a basket weaving course

• What course would Steve like?

AI: Chapter 9: Inference in First-Order

March 14,
Logic
2006
62
ONTOLOGY………….

• Ontology is defined as a set of concepts and categories in a subject area or domain that
shows their properties and the relations between them.

• Ontological Engineering studies the methods and methodologies for building ontologies.
Limitations of logic representation
• Inability to represent exceptions and uncertainty
Ontological Engineering studies………….

How to create more general and flexible representations.

• Concepts like actions, time, physical object and beliefs
• Operates on a bigger scale than K.E.
Define general framework of concepts
• Upper ontology
THE UPPER ONTOLOGY OF THE WORLD
DIFFERENCE WITH SPECIAL-PURPOSE ONTOLOGIES
A general-purpose ontology should be applicable in more or less any special-purpose domain.
Add domain-specific axioms
In any sufficiently demanding domain different areas of knowledge need to be unified.
Reasoning and problem solving could involve several areas simultaneously
What do we need to express?
Categories, Measures, Composite objects, Time, Space, Change,
Events, Processes, Physical Objects, Substances, Mental
Objects, Beliefs
CATEGORIES AND OBJECTS
KR requires the organization of objects into categories
– Interaction at the level of the object
– Reasoning at the level of categories
Categories play a role in predictions about objects
– Based on perceived properties
Categories can be represented in two ways by FOL
– Predicates: apple(x)
– Reification of categories into objects: apples
Category = set of its members
CATEGORY
ORGANIZATION

Relation = inheritance:
– All instance of food are edible, fruit
is a subclass of food and apples is a
subclass of fruit then an apple is
edible.
Defines a taxonomy
FOL AND CATEGORIES
An object is a member of a category
– MemberOf(BB12,Basketballs)
A category is a subclass of another category
– SubsetOf(Basketballs,Balls)
All members of a category have some properties
–  x (MemberOf(x,Basketballs)  Round(x))
All members of a category can be recognized by some properties
–  x (Orange(x)  Round(x)  Diameter(x)=9.5in 
MemberOf(x,Balls)  MemberOf(x,BasketBalls))
A category as a whole has some properties
– MemberOf(Dogs,DomesticatedSpecies)
RELATIONS BETWEEN CATEGORIES
Two or more categories are disjoint if they have no members in common:
– Disjoint(s)( c1,c2 c1  s  c2  s  c1 ¹ c2  Intersection(c1,c2)
={})
– Example; Disjoint({animals, vegetables})
A set of categories s constitutes an exhaustive decomposition of a category c if
all members of the set c are covered by categories in s:
– E.D.(s,c)  ( i i  c   c2 c2  s  i  c2)
– Example: ExhaustiveDecomposition({Americans, Canadian,
Mexicans},NorthAmericans).
RELATIONS BETWEEN CATEGORIES
A partition is a disjoint exhaustive decomposition:
– Partition(s,c)  Disjoint(s)  E.D.(s,c)
– Example: Partition({Males,Females},Persons)

Is ({Americans,Canadian, Mexicans},NorthAmericans) a partition?

Categories can be defined by providing necessary and sufficient conditions

for membership
–  x Bachelor(x)  Male(x)  Adult(x)  Unmarried(x)
NATURAL KINDS
• Many categories have no clear-cut definitions (chair, bush, book).
• Tomatoes: sometimes green, red, yellow, black. Mostly round.
• One solution: category Typical(Tomatoes).
•  x, x  Typical(Tomatoes)  Red(x)  Spherical(x).
• We can write down useful facts about categories without providing
exact definitions.
PHYSICAL COMPOSITION
• One object may be part of another:
• PartOf(Bucharest,Romania)
• PartOf(Romania,EasternEurope)
• PartOf(EasternEurope,Europe)
• The PartOf predicate is transitive (and irreflexive), so we can infer that
PartOf(Bucharest,Europe)
• More generally:
•  x PartOf(x,x)
•  x,y,z PartOf(x,y)  PartOf(y,z)  PartOf(x,z)
MEASUREMENTS
• Objects have height, mass, cost, ....
Values that we assign to these are measures
• Combine Unit functions with a number: Length(L1) = Inches(1.5) =
Centimeters(3.81).
• Conversion between units:
 i Centimeters(2.54 x i)=Inches(i).
• Some measures have no scale: Beauty, Difficulty, etc.
• Most important aspect of measures: is that they are orderable.
• Don't care about the actual numbers. (An apple can have
deliciousness .9 or .1.)
ACTIONS, EVENTS AND SITUATIONS

• Reasoning about outcome

of actions is central to KB-
agent.
• How can we keep track of
location in FOL?
•Remember the
multiple copies
Representing time by
situations (states
resulting from the
execution of actions).
•Situation calculus
ACTIONS, EVENTS AND SITUATIONS

Situation calculus:
Actions are logical terms
Situations are logical terms
consiting of
The initial situation I
All situations resulting
from the action on I
(=Result(a,s))
Fluent are functions and
predicates that vary from one
situation to the next.
E.g. Holding(G1, S0)
Eternal predicates are also
allowed
E.g. Gold(G1)
ACTIONS, EVENTS AND SITUATIONS

• Results of action
sequences are determined
by the individual actions.
• Projection task: an SC
agent should be able to
deduce the outcome of a
sequence of actions.
• Planning task: find a
sequence that achieves a
desirable effect
ACTIONS, EVENTS AND SITUATIONS
DESCRIBING CHANGE
• Simple Situation calculus requires two axioms to describe change:
• Possibility axiom: when is it possible to do the action
At(Agent,x,s)  Adjacent(x,y)  Poss(Go(x,y),s)
• Effect axiom: describe changes due to action
Poss(Go(x,y),s)  At(Agent,y,Result(Go(x,y),s))
• What stays the same?
• Frame problem: how to represent all things that stay the same?
• Frame axiom: describe non-changes due to actions
At(o,x,s)  (o  Agent)  Holding(o,s)  At(o,x,Result(Go(y,z),s))
REPRESENTATIONAL FRAME PROBLEM
• If there are F fluents and A actions then we need AF frame axioms to
describe other objects are stationary unless they are held.
• We write down the effect of each actions
• Solution; describe how each fluent changes over time
• Successor-state axiom:
Pos(a,s)  (At(Agent,y,Result(a,s))  (a = Go(x,y)) 
(At(Agent,y,s)  a  Go(y,z))
• Note that next state is completely specified by current state.
• Each action effect is mentioned only once.
OTHER PROBLEMS
• How to deal with secondary (implicit) effects?
• If the agent is carrying the gold and the agent moves then the gold
moves too.
• Ramification problem
• How to decide EFFICIENTLY whether fluents hold in the future?
• Inferential frame problem.
• Extensions:
• Event calculus (when actions have a duration)
• Process categories
MENTAL EVENTS AND OBJECTS
• So far, KB agents can have beliefs and deduce new beliefs
• What about knowledge about beliefs? What about knowledge about the
inference process?
• Requires a model of the mental objects in someone’s head and the
processes that manipulate these objects.
• Relationships between agents and mental objects: believes, knows, wants,
…
• Believes(Lois,Flies(Superman)) with Flies(Superman) being a function
… a candidate for a mental object (reification).
• Agent can now reason about the beliefs of agents.
THE INTERNET SHOPPING WORLD
• A Knowledge Engineering example
• An agent that helps a buyer to find product offers on the internet.
• IN = product description (precise or precise)
• OUT = list of webpages that offer the product for sale.
• Environment = WWW
• Percepts = web pages (character strings)
• Extracting useful information required.
THE INTERNET SHOPPING WORLD
• Find relevant product offers
RelevantOffer(page,url,query)  Relevant(page, url, query)  Offer(page)
• Write axioms to define Offer(x)
• Find relevant pages: Relevant(x,y,z) ?
• Start from an initial set of stores.
• What is a relevant category?
• What are relevant connected pages?
• Require rich category vocabulary.
• Synonymy and ambiguity
• How to retrieve pages: GetPage(url)?
• Procedural attachment
• Compare offers (information extraction).
REASONING SYSTEMS FOR CATEGORIES
• How to organise and reason with categories?
• Semantic networks
• Visualize knowledge-base
• Efficient algorithms for category membership inference
• Description logics
• Formal language for constructing and combining category
definitions
• Efficient algorithms to decide subset and superset relationships
between categories.
SEMANTIC NETWORKS
• Logic vs. semantic networks
• Many variations
• All represent individual objects, categories of objects and relationships
among objects.
• Allows for inheritance reasoning
• Female persons inherit all properties from person.
• Cfr. OO programming.
• Inference of inverse links
• SisterOf vs. HasSister
SEMANTIC NETWORK EXAMPLE
SEMANTIC NETWORKS

• Drawbacks
• Links can only assert binary relations
• Can be resolved by reification of the proposition as an event
• Representation of default values
• Enforced by the inheritance mechanism.
DESCRIPTION LOGICS

• Are designed to describe defintions and properties about categories

• A formalization of semantic networks
• Principal inference task is
• Subsumption: checking if one category is the subset of another by
comparing their definitions
• Classification: checking whether an object belongs to a category.
• Consistency: whether the category membership criteria are logically
satisfiable.
REASONING WITH DEFAULT INFORMATION

• “The following courses are offered: CS101, CS102, CS106, EE101”

• Four (db)
• Assume that this information is complete (not asserted ground atomic sentences are false)
= CLOSED WORLD ASSUMPTION
• Assume that distinct names refer to distinct objects
= UNIQUE NAMES ASSUMPTION
• Between one and infinity (logic)
• Does not make these assumptions
• Requires completion.
TRUTH MAINTENANCE SYSTEMS
• Many of the inferences have default status rather than being absolutely
certain
• Inferred facts can be wrong and need to be retracted = BELIEF
REVISION.
• Assume KB contains sentence P and we want to execute TELL(KB,
P)
• To avoid contradiction: RETRACT(KB,P)
• But what about sentences inferred from P?
• Truth maintenance systems are designed to handle these complications.