Existential Graphs: Beta Introduction to Logic. Alpha Review: Symbolization ‘P’ ‘not P’ ‘P and Q’ ‘P or Q’ ‘if P then Q’ F EG PP PP P  Q P  Q P 

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Artificial Intelligence
Advertisements

L41 Lecture 2: Predicates and Quantifiers.. L42 Agenda Predicates and Quantifiers –Existential Quantifier  –Universal Quantifier 
Truth Trees Intermediate Logic.
22C:19 Discrete Structures Logic and Proof Spring 2014 Sukumar Ghosh.
Formalizing Alpha: Soundness and Completeness Bram van Heuveln Dept. of Cognitive Science RPI.
Inference and Resolution for Problem Solving
Existential Graphs and Davis-Putnam April 3, 2002 Bram van Heuveln Department of Cognitive Science.
Using the EG Applet Bram van Heuveln. Contents General Comments –Some general comments regarding the use of the applet Work Area –Instructions for creating.
Alpha: Symbolization and Inference Bram van Heuveln Minds and Machines Lab RPI.
CSE115/ENGR160 Discrete Mathematics 01/20/11 Ming-Hsuan Yang UC Merced 1.
Predicates and Quantifiers
Section 1.3: Predicates and Quantifiers
CS2013 Maths for Computing Science Proof (part b) Adam Wyner University of Aberdeen Computing Science.
CSE 311 Foundations of Computing I Lecture 6 Predicate Logic, Logical Inference Spring
Logical Equivalence & Predicate Logic
Discrete Mathematics and Its Applications
A Brief Summary for Exam 1 Subject Topics Propositional Logic (sections 1.1, 1.2) –Propositions Statement, Truth value, Proposition, Propositional symbol,
A Java Implementation of Peirce’s Existential Graphs Bram van Heuveln Department of Philosophy State University College at Oneonta March 22, 2001.
Atomic Sentences Chapter 1 Language, Proof and Logic.
Nested Quantifiers. 2 Nested Iteration Let the domain be {1, 2, …, 10}. Let P(x, y) denote x > y.  x,  y, P(x, y) means  x, (  y, P(x, y) ) Is the.
Chapter 1, Part II: Predicate Logic With Question/Answer Animations.
PART TWO PREDICATE LOGIC. Chapter Seven Predicate Logic Symbolization.
Existential Graphs Intermediate Logic. Existential Graphs A graphical logic system developed by C.S. Peirce almost 100 years ago. Peirce studied semiotics:
Chapter 1, Part II: Predicate Logic With Question/Answer Animations.
Statements with Multiple Quantifiers. When a statement contains more than one quantifier, we imagine the actions suggested by the quantifiers as being.
1 Predicate (Relational) Logic 1. Introduction The propositional logic is not powerful enough to express certain types of relationship between propositions.
Copyright © Curt Hill Quantifiers. Copyright © Curt Hill Introduction What we have seen is called propositional logic It includes.
Automated Theorem Proving: Resolution and Davis-Putnam Intermediate Logic.
Math 51/COEN 19 Day 3, 1.4 Quantifiers 1. 3 Predicates A lot like functions that return booleans Let P(x) denote x
A Java implementation of Peirce’s Alpha Graphs Bram van Heuveln (RPI) Dennis Higgins (SUNY Oneonta) SUNY Oneonta undergraduate programmers: Elizabeth Hatfield,
A Java implementation of Peirce’s Existential Graphs* faculty advisors: Bram van Heuveln (Philosophy) Dennis Higgins (Math & Computer Science) student.
A Java implementation of Peirce’s Existential Graphs
CSE 311 Foundations of Computing I Lecture 7 Logical Inference Autumn 2012 CSE
Hazırlayan DISCRETE COMPUTATIONAL STRUCTURES Propositional Logic PROF. DR. YUSUF OYSAL.
6. 1 Multiplication with Exponents and Scientific Notation 6
Automated Reasoning Early AI explored how to automated several reasoning tasks – these were solved by what we might call weak problem solving methods as.
1 Introduction to Abstract Mathematics Predicate Logic Instructor: Hayk Melikya Purpose of Section: To introduce predicate logic (or.
LOGIC AND QUANTIFIERS. INTRODUCTION Many algorithms and proofs use logical expressions such as: “IF p THEN q” or “If p1 AND p2, THEN q1 OR q2” Therefore.
Lecture 7 – Jan 28, Chapter 2 The Logic of Quantified Statements.
For Wednesday Read chapter 9, sections 1-3 Homework: –Chapter 7, exercises 8 and 9.
Fall 2008/2009 I. Arwa Linjawi & I. Asma’a Ashenkity 1 The Foundations: Logic and Proofs Predicates and Quantifiers.
Propositional Logic Predicate Logic
CS 285- Discrete Mathematics Lecture 4. Section 1.3 Predicate logic Predicate logic is an extension of propositional logic that permits concisely reasoning.
For Friday Read chapter 8 Homework: –Chapter 7, exercises 2 and 10 Program 1, Milestone 2 due.
Predicates and Quantifiers Dr. Yasir Ali. 1.Predicates 2.Quantifiers a.Universal Quantifiers b.Existential Quantifiers 3.Negation of Quantifiers 4.Universal.
Predicate Logic One step stronger than propositional logic Copyright © Curt Hill.
22C:19 Discrete Structures Logic and Proof Fall 2014 Sukumar Ghosh.
Week 4 - Friday.  What did we talk about last time?  Floor and ceiling  Proof by contradiction.
PREDICATES AND QUANTIFIERS COSC-1321 Discrete Structures 1.
The Existential Graphs Project Rensselaer Reasoning Group September 12, 2001.
Section 1.4. Propositional Functions Propositional functions become propositions (and have truth values) when their variables are each replaced by a value.
Introduction to Predicates and Quantified Statements I Lecture 9 Section 2.1 Wed, Jan 31, 2007.
Discrete Mathematical Structures: Theory and Applications 1 Logic: Learning Objectives  Learn about statements (propositions)  Learn how to use logical.
Propositional and predicate logic
رياضيات متقطعة لعلوم الحاسب MATH 226. Chapter 1 Predicates and Quantifiers 1.4.
Boolean Algebra & Logic Gates
Advanced Algorithms Analysis and Design
Rationale Behind the Precise Formulation of the Four Quantifier Rules
Chapter 1: The Foundations: Logic and Proofs
CS201: Data Structures and Discrete Mathematics I
CS 1502 Formal Methods in Computer Science
Introduction to Predicates and Quantified Statements I
Discrete Mathematics Lecture 4 & 5: Predicate and Quantifier
Negations of quantifiers
Discrete Mathematics Lecture 3: Predicate and Quantifier
Discrete Mathematics CMP-200 Propositional Equivalences, Predicates & Quantifiers, Negating Quantified Statements Abdul Hameed
Discrete Mathematics Lecture 4 & 5: Predicate and Quantifier
Predicates and Quantifiers
CS201: Data Structures and Discrete Mathematics I
Presentation transcript:

Existential Graphs: Beta Introduction to Logic

Alpha Review: Symbolization ‘P’ ‘not P’ ‘P and Q’ ‘P or Q’ ‘if P then Q’ F EG PP PP P  Q P  Q P  Q P Q QP P QP

Alpha Review: Inference Rules Double Cut (De)Iteration Erasure Insertion        12k  1   12k+1  1 

Beta: Symbolization The Beta part of Existential Graphs corresponds to predicate logic. Just as predicate logic is an extension of propositional logic, Beta is an extension of Alpha. Beta Graphs correspond to statements from Predicate Logic. To define Beta Graphs, we need to define how we symbolize objects, individuals constants, identity, predicates, and quantifiers.

Objects In Beta, objects are symbolized using a dot: Putting a dot on the SA asserts the existence of an object: Notice that F and other traditional logic systems don’t have the ability to express that something exists in a simple fashion: ‘  x’ is not a statement in F. Moreover, F and other traditional logic systems take this very claim as a given, i.e. F makes the Assumption of Existential Import. EG does not do this.

Individual Constants We can use individual constants to refer to specific objects. To do this, simply write the name next to the object: a Placing this on the SA asserts the existence of the object we named: a Again, F and other traditional logic systems have no means of expressing this in a straightforward way.

Identity To express that two objects are identical, place the two dots representing those two objects next to each other: This can be done for any number of dots, resulting in a line: A line on the SA asserts that there are a whole bunch of objects, all identical to each other. As such, it makes a claim that is logically equivalent to the claim that is made by putting a single dot on the SA. Therefore, we can interchange between lines and dots.

Non-Identity To express that two objects are not identical, we use the cut to negate the claim that the two objects are identical. This is best seen using lines instead of dots: To claim the existence of three distinct objects:

Predicates To express that an object has a certain property P, simply write the predicate symbol next to the object: P To express a relationship R between two or more objects, write the predicate symbol between the objects: R To express that an object does not have a certain property P, use the cut: P

Quantifiers Obviously, the dots or lines will serve as existential quantifiers. That is, a claim like  x Cube(x) will be symbolized in Beta as: Cube To express a claim like  x Cube(x), we use the Quantifier Negation or Quantifier DeMorgan Equivalences. So, since  x Cube(x)   x  Cube(x), we express  x Cube(x) in Beta as: Cube

The Boolean Square of Opposition  x P(x)   x  P(x)  x  P(x)  x P(x)  x  P(x)   x P(x) : Contradictories PP P P ‘Everything is P’‘Nothing is P’ ‘Something is P’‘Something is not P’

The Aristotelean Square of Opposition  x (P(x)  Q(x))   x (P(x)  Q(x))  x (P(x)  Q(x))  x (P(x)  Q(x)) : Contradictories P P ‘Every P is Q’‘No P is Q’ ‘Some P is Q’‘Some P is not Q’  x (P(x)  Q(x))   x (P(x)  Q(x)) Q P Q P Q P Q

Beta Inference Rules Beta inherits the four inference rules from Alpha, but adds a few things to those rules to deal with objects and predicates. Beta does not introduce any new rules. In defining the rules, the notions of double cut, level, and nested level remain the same, while graphs are understood to be Beta Graphs. We do, however, have to define a new notion, namely that of a nested object.

Nested Objects An object y is nested with regard to object x if and only if there is a line going from x to y that does not go outside any cut. Example: a b In this graph, b is nested with regard to a. a b In this graph, b exists at a nested level with regard to a, but b is not a nested object with regard to a.

Beta Inference Rules: Insertion The only addition to the rule of Insertion is that on an odd level, two lines may be connected. Example: P Q P P Q IN It may be useful, however, to define Insertion in such a way that the above two steps can be taken at once: P Q P IN

Beta Inference Rules: Erasure The only addition to the rule of Erasure is that on an even level, two lines may be disconnected. Example: P Q PP Q E E Again, it may be useful to define Erasure in such a way that the above two steps can be taken at once: P Q P E

Beta Inference Rules: Double Cut The only addition to the rule of Double Cut is that any lines that pass all the way through a double cut can be ignored. Example: P Q P Q DC

Beta Inference Rules: (De)Iteration The only addition to the rule of Iteration is that any n-ary predicate R (including the empty predicate) relating objects y 1 … y n can be copied into any level and attached to objects z 1 … z n as long as the copy exists at a nested level with regard to the original and to each of the objects z 1 … z n and there exists a series of objects x 1 … x n such that each y i and z i are nested objects with regard to x i. Example: P P IT P P

Example  x Cube(x)  x (Cube(x)  Small(x))   x Small(x) C C S C C S C C S C S C S S IT IN DE DCE