Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Chapter06-Agents That Reason Logically-AI TTNT NNTu
Chapter06-Agents That Reason Logically-AI TTNT NNTu
Chapter 06
Contents
Knowledge-based agents Wumpus world Logic in general - models and entailment Propositional (Boolean) logic Equivalence, validity, satisfiability Inference rules and theorem proving
forward chaining backward chaining resolution
HoaSen University
Outline
Knowledge-based agents Wumpus world Logic in general - models and entailment Propositional (Boolean) logic Equivalence, validity, satisfiability Inference rules and theorem proving
forward chaining backward chaining resolution
Knowledge bases
Knowledge base = set of sentences in a formal language Declarative approach to building an agent (or other system):
Tell it what it needs to know
Then it can Ask itself what to do - answers should follow from the KB Agents can be viewed at the knowledge level
i.e., what they know, regardless of how implemented
Environment
Squares adjacent to wumpus are smelly Squares adjacent to pit are breezy Glitter iff gold is in the same square Shooting kills wumpus if you are facing it Shooting uses up the only arrow Grabbing picks up gold if in same square Releasing drops the gold in same square
Sensors: Stench, Breeze, Glitter, Bump, Scream Actuators: Left turn, Right turn, Forward, Grab, Release, Shoot
Logic in general
Logics are formal languages for representing information such that conclusions can be drawn Syntax defines the sentences in the language Semantics define the "meaning" of sentences;
i.e., define truth of a sentence in a world
Entailment
Entailment means that one thing follows from another: KB Knowledge base KB entails sentence if and only if is true in all worlds where KB is true
E.g., the KB containing the Giants won and the Reds won entails Either the Giants won or the Reds won E.g., x+y = 4 entails 4 = x+y Entailment is a relationship between sentences (i.e., syntax) that is based on semantics
Models
Logicians typically think in terms of models, which are formally structured worlds with respect to which truth can be evaluated We say m is a model of a sentence if is true in m
Wumpus models
Wumpus models
KB = wumpus-world rules + observations
Wumpus models
KB = wumpus-world rules + observations 1 = "[1,2] is safe", KB 1, proved by model checking
Wumpus models
KB = wumpus-world rules + observations
Wumpus models
KB = wumpus-world rules + observations 2 = "[2,2] is safe", KB 2
Inference
KB i = sentence can be derived from KB by procedure i Soundness: i is sound if whenever KB i , it is also true that KB Completeness: i is complete if whenever KB , it is also true that KB i Preview: we will define a logic (first-order logic) which is expressive enough to say almost anything of interest, and for which there exists a sound and complete inference procedure. That is, the procedure will answer any question whose answer follows from what is known by the KB.
With these symbols, 8 possible models, can be enumerated automatically. Rules for evaluating truth with respect to a model m:
S S1 S2 S1 S2 S1 S2 i.e., S1 S2 is true iff is true iff is true iff is true iff is false iff is true iff S is false S1 is true and S2 is true S1is true or S2 is true S1 is false or S2 is true S1 is true and S2 is false S1S2 is true andS2S1 is true
Simple recursive process evaluates an arbitrary sentence, e.g., P1,2 (P2,2 P3,1) = true (true false) = true true = true
Inference by enumeration
Depth-first enumeration of all models is sound and complete
Logical equivalence
Two sentences are {logically equivalent} iff true in same models: iff and
Proof methods
Proof methods divide into (roughly) two kinds:
Application of inference rules
Legitimate (sound) generation of new sentences from old Proof = a sequence of inference rule applications Can use inference rules as operators in a standard search algorithm Typically require transformation of sentences into a normal form
Model checking
truth table enumeration (always exponential in n) improved backtracking, e.g., Davis--Putnam-Logemann-Loveland (DPLL) heuristic search in model space (sound but incomplete) e.g., min-conflicts-like hill-climbing algorithms
Resolution
Conjunctive Normal Form (CNF)
conjunction of disjunctions of literals clauses E.g., (A B) (B C D)
m1 mn
li li-1 li+1 lk m1 mj-1 mj+1 ... mn where li and mj are complementary literals. E.g., P1,3 P2,2, P2,2 P1,3 Resolution is sound and complete for propositional logic
Resolution
Soundness of resolution inference rule:
(li li-1 li+1 lk) li mj (m1 mj-1 mj+1 ... mn) (li li-1 li+1 lk) (m1 mj-1 mj+1 ... mn)
Conversion to CNF
B1,1 (P1,2 P2,1) 1. Eliminate , replacing with ( )( ).
(B1,1 (P1,2 P2,1)) ((P1,2 P2,1) B1,1)
Resolution algorithm
Proof by contradiction, i.e., show KB unsatisfiable
Resolution example
KB = (B1,1 (P1,2 P2,1)) B1,1 = P1,2
Modus Ponens (for Horn Form): complete for Horn KBs 1, ,n, 1 n Can be used with forward chaining or backward chaining. These algorithms are very natural and run in linear time
Forward chaining
Idea: fire any rule whose premises are satisfied in the KB,
add its conclusion to the KB, until query is found
Proof of completeness
FC derives every atomic sentence that is entailed by KB
1. FC reaches a fixed point where no new atomic sentences are derived 2. Consider the final state as a model m, assigning true/false to symbols 3. Every clause in the original KB is true in m
a1 ak b
Backward chaining
Idea: work backwards from the query q:
to prove q by BC,
check if q is known already, or prove by BC all premises of some rule concluding q
Avoid loops: check if new subgoal is already on the goal stack Avoid repeated work: check if new subgoal
Complete backtracking search algorithms DPLL algorithm (Davis, Putnam, Logemann, Loveland) Incomplete local search algorithms
WalkSAT algorithm
P1,1 W1,1 Bx,y (Px,y+1 Px,y-1 Px+1,y Px-1,y) Sx,y (Wx,y+1 Wx,y-1 Wx+1,y Wx-1,y) W1,1 W1,2 W4,4 W1,1 W1,2 W1,1 W1,3
Summary
Logical agents apply inference to a knowledge base to derive new information and make decisions Basic concepts of logic:
syntax: formal structure of sentences semantics: truth of sentences wrt models entailment: necessary truth of one sentence given another inference: deriving sentences from other sentences soundness: derivations produce only entailed sentences completeness: derivations can produce all entailed sentences
Wumpus world requires the ability to represent partial and negated information, reason by cases, etc. Resolution is complete for propositional logic Forward, backward chaining are linear-time, complete for Horn clauses Propositional logic lacks expressive power
Q/A
HoaSen University
77
HoaSen University
78