Given the following: If the unicorn is mythical, then it is immortal, but if it is not mythical, then it is a mortal mammal. If the unicorn is either immortal or a mammal, then it is horned. The unicorn is magical if it is horned. Representing the above as a knowledge base of sentences in propositional logic using the proposition given below results in s1 through s4: Y: the unicorn is mythical I: the unicorn is immortal A: the unicorn is a mammal H: the unicorn is horned G: the unicorn is magical s1: If the unicorn is mythical, then it is immortal : Y =I s2: If it is not mythical, then it is a mortal mammal : ¬Y=A ^ ¬I s3: If the unicorn is either immortal or a mammal, then it is horned : I V A=H s4: The unicorn is magical if it is horned : H= G 1. 1 and show that the sentence G, the unicorn is magical, follows from the knowledge base (circle the models that satisfy the KB and G in the truth table). ) Use a truth table to show all interpretations/models that satisfy the knowledge base

Given the following: If the unicorn is mythical, then it is immortal, but if it is not mythical, then it is a mortal mammal. If the unicorn is either immortal or a mammal, then it is horned. The unicorn is magical if it is horned. Representing the above as a knowledge base of sentences in propositional logic using the proposition given below results in s1 through s4: Y: the unicorn is mythical I: the unicorn is immortal A: the unicorn is a mammal H: the unicorn is horned G: the unicorn is magical s1: If the unicorn is mythical, then it is immortal : Y =I s2: If it is not mythical, then it is a mortal mammal : ¬Y=A ^ ¬I s3: If the unicorn is either immortal or a mammal, then it is horned : I V A=H s4: The unicorn is magical if it is horned : H= G 1. 1 and show that the sentence G, the unicorn is magical, follows from the knowledge base (circle the models that satisfy the KB and G in the truth table). ) Use a truth table to show all interpretations/models that satisfy the knowledge base

Database System Concepts

7th Edition

ISBN:9780078022159

Author:Abraham Silberschatz Professor, Henry F. Korth, S. Sudarshan

Publisher:Abraham Silberschatz Professor, Henry F. Korth, S. Sudarshan

Chapter1: Introduction

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 1PE

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

Convert each of the following argu- ments into formal statements, e.g., define sentences existentially and/or universally quantified statements. Then determine which rules of logic have been applied and explain whether or not they have been ap- plied correctly. if you do the homework you will pass the final. Somebody did not pass the final. Therefore somebody did not not do the homework. If you do the homework you will pass the final. Curly did not do the homework. Therefore Curly will not pass the final. If you don’t do the homework, you won’t pass the final. Moe did the homework. Therefore Moe passed the final.
Which of the following is NOT a need of formal logic? express propositions describe how new propositions can be inferred from other propositions that are assumed to be true. express the relationships between propositions describe how new relationships can be inferred from other relationships that are assumed to be true.
I will thumbs up if you answer all. please convert FOL to CNF Convert each of the following English statements into a single first-order logic sentence using the following constants and predicates. •Constants: Apples, Oranges, Chess, Go, John, Mary. •Predicates: oLikes(x,y): person x likes food y oPlays(x,y): person x plays game y a.If a personlikesApples, then they play chess. b.If a person likesOranges, then they play Go. c.A person likesApples or Oranges, but not both. d.John likes apples. e.Mary does not like anything that John likes. and then: Convert each of the first-order logic sentences in Problem 2to conjunctive normal form (CNF). There is no need to show intermediate steps. Assign each clause number: C1, C2, etc.
Computer Science Please make sure your answer is legible Use First order Predicate Logic (FOPL) to represent the following English sentences. Make up appropriate predicates in each case. a) He only likes women that do not like him. b) Some of the women he likes do not like him.
Translate the following propositional calculus into plain English without using X, Y and L: VX,Y, L Understand (X, L) Understand (Y, L) → Friend (X, Y) A Friend (Y, X)
Let p, q, and r be the propositions p: You started a new video game this week. q: You finished all its quests.r: You didn’t win the platinum trophy.Express each of these propositions as an English sentence.¬p → ¬q(p ∧ q) → (¬r)((¬p) → (¬q)) ∨ (q → (¬r))(p ∧ q) ∨ (¬q ∧ r)
A propositional knowledge-base KB consisting of five sentences is given below (note that "/\" is used to denote "logical and", and "\/" is used to denote "logical or", and "~" is used to denote "logical negation"): 1. (~P /\ ~Q ) -> R2. R -> S3. ~S4. P -> ~U5. U a) Explain in English (in Steps!) that KB |= Q. b) Show resolution steps that leads to KB |- Q. You should first convert the sentences in the KB into clauses.
(a) Is it possible for an argument to be sound and have a false conclusion? Explainyour answer (in one or two sentences).(b) Is it possible for an argument to be invalid and have a true conclusion? Explainyour answer (in one or two sentences).(c) Explain what a tautology is.(d) Explain what semantic entailment is.(e) State the deduction theorem.(f) If A ⊨ B, then A, C ⊨ B. What is this feature of entailment known as?
Learning Objective: Prove the validity of sequents using the natural deduction rules of predicate logic. Exercise: Prove the validity of the sequent: (y = 0) ^ (y=x) + 0 = x, using among others, the rules i and=e. For any use of the e rule, specify the formula and the terms t₁ and to which are used.
For each of the following statements about regular expressions α, β and languages A, B, state whether they are true or false. Provide a one-sentence justification for each answer.
Prove the following predicate logic statements valid or invalid: A) ∀x(A(x) → B(x)) ∧ ∀x(A(x) ∨ ¬C(x)) ∧ ∃x(¬B(x)) → ¬∃x(¬A(x) ∧ ¬B(x) ∧ ¬C(x)) B) ∀x(A(x) → B(x)) ∧ ∃x(A(x) ∨ B(x)) → ∃x(A(x) ∧ B(x))
Select all that are true. a) Given a propositional formula O on n variables, it is always possible to determine whether is a tautology. U b) Given a sentence in predicate logic , if we apply an "equivalence rule" to produce an equivalent sentence p, it is possible that p evalutes to T but evalutes to F, or vice-versa. Oc) Given a propositional formula y, if we apply an "equivalence rule" to produce an equivalent formula , it is possible that p evaluates to T on some truth assignment but evaluates to F on the same truth assignment, or vice- versa. Od) Given two propositional formulas P and on (the same) n variables, it is always possible to determine whether P and are (logically) equivalent.