B.Tech.

III Year CSE II Sem Artificial Intelligence Unit III

UNIT III

Logic Concepts: Introduction, propositional calculus, proportional logic, natural deduction

system, axiomatic system, semantic tableau system in proportional logic, resolution refutation in
proportional logic, predicate logic

1.1.Propositional Logic Concepts:

 Logic is a study of principles used to

− distinguish correct from incorrect reasoning.

 Formally it deals with

− the notion of truth in an abstract sense and is concerned with the principles of
valid inferencing.

 A proposition in logic is a declarative statements which are either true or false (but not
both) in a given context. For example,

− “Jack is a male”,

− "Jack loves Mary" etc.

 Given some propositions to be true in a given context,

− logic helps in inferencing new proposition, which is also true in the same context.

 Suppose we are given a set of propositions such as

− “It is hot today" and

− “If it is hot it will rain", then

− we can infer that

“It will rain today".

1.2.Well-formed formula

 Propositional Calculus (PC) is a language of propositions basically refers

− to set of rules used to combine the propositions to form compound propositions

using logical operators often called connectives such as , V, ~, , 

 Well-formed formula is defined as:

Prepared by N Md Jubair basha, Associate. Professor, CSED,KHIT Page 1

www.Jntufastupdates.com
B.Tech. III Year CSE II Sem Artificial Intelligence Unit III

− An atom is a well-formed formula.

− If  is a well-formed formula, then ~ is a well-formed formula.

− If  and  are well formed formulae, then (  ), ( V  ), (  ), ( 

 ) are also well-formed formulae.

− A propositional expression is a well-formed formula if and only if it can be

obtained by using above conditions.

1.3.Truth Table

● Truth table gives us operational definitions of important logical operators.

− By using truth table, the truth values of well-formed formulae are calculated.

● Truth table elaborates all possible truth values of a formula.

The meanings of the logical operators are given by the following truth table.

P Q ~P PQ PVQ P Q P  Q

T T F T T T T

T F F F T F F

F T T F T T F

F F T F F T T

1.4.Equivalence Laws:

Commutation

1. PQ  Q P

2. P V Q  Q V P

Association

1. P  (Q  R)  (P  Q)  R

2. P V (Q V R)  (P V Q) V R

Double Negation

~ (~ P)  P

Prepared by N Md Jubair basha, Associate. Professor, CSED,KHIT Page 2

www.Jntufastupdates.com
B.Tech. III Year CSE II Sem Artificial Intelligence Unit III

Distributive Laws

1. P  ( Q V R)  (P  Q) V (P  R)

2. P V ( Q  R)  (P V Q)  (P V R)

De Morgan’s Laws

1. ~ (P  Q)  ~P V~Q

2. ~ (P V Q)  ~P ~Q

Law of Excluded Middle

P V ~P  T (true)

Law of Contradiction

P  ~P  F (false)

2. Propositional Logic – PL

● PL deals with

− the validity, satisfiability and unsatisfiability of a formula

− derivation of a new formula using equivalence laws.

● Each row of a truth table for a given formula is called its interpretation under which a
formula can be true or false.

● A formula  is called tautology if and only

− if  is true for all interpretations.

● A formula  is also called valid if and only if

− it is a tautology.

● Let  be a formula and if there exist at least one interpretation for which  is true,

− then  is said to be consistent (satisfiable) i.e., if  a model for , then  is said

to be consistent .

● A formula  is said to be inconsistent (unsatisfiable), if and only if

−  is always false under all interpretations.

Prepared by N Md Jubair basha, Associate. Professor, CSED,KHIT Page 3

www.Jntufastupdates.com
B.Tech. III Year CSE II Sem Artificial Intelligence Unit III

● We can translate

− simple declarative and

conditional (if .. then) natural language sentences into its corresponding propositional formulae.

Example

● Show that " It is humid today and if it is humid then it will rain so it will rain today" is a
valid argument.

● Solution: Let us symbolize English sentences by propositional atoms as follows:

A : It is humid

B : It will rain

● Formula corresponding to a text:

 : ((A  B)  A)  B

● Using truth table approach, one can see that  is true under all four interpretations and
hence is valid argument.

Truth Table for ((A  B)  A)  B

A B A B=X XA= Y Y B

T T T T T

T F F F T

F T T F T

F F T F T

● Truth table method for problem solving is

− simple and straightforward and

− very good at presenting a survey of all the truth possibilities in a given situation.

● It is an easy method to evaluate

Prepared by N Md Jubair basha, Associate. Professor, CSED,KHIT Page 4

www.Jntufastupdates.com
B.Tech. III Year CSE II Sem Artificial Intelligence Unit III

− a consistency, inconsistency or validity of a formula, but the size of truth table

grows exponentially.

− Truth table method is good for small values of n.

● For example, if a formula contains n atoms, then the truth table will contain 2n entries.

− A formula  : (P  Q  R)  ( Q V S) is valid can be proved using truth table.

− A table of 16 rows is constructed and the truth values of  are computed.

− Since the truth value of  is true under all 16 interpretations, it is valid.

● It is noticed that if P  Q  R is false, then  is true because of the definition of .

● Since P  Q  R is false for 14 entries out of 16, we are left only with two entries to be
tested for which  is true.

− So in order to prove the validity of a formula, all the entries in the truth table may
not be relevant.

● Other methods which are concerned with proofs and deductions of logical formula are as
follows:

− Natural Deductive System

− Axiomatic System

− Semantic Tableaux Method

− Resolution Refutation Method

3. Natural deduction method – ND

● ND is based on the set of few deductive inference rules.

● The name natural deductive system is given because it mimics the pattern of natural
reasoning.

● It has about 10 deductive inference rules.

Conventions:

− E for Elimination.

− P, Pk , (1  k  n) are atoms.

Prepared by N Md Jubair basha, Associate. Professor, CSED,KHIT Page 5

www.Jntufastupdates.com
B.Tech. III Year CSE II Sem Artificial Intelligence Unit III

− k, (1  k  n) and  are formulae.

Natural Deduction Rules:

Rule 1: I- (Introducing )

I- : If P1, P2, …, Pn then P1  P2  … Pn

Interpretation: If we have hypothesized or proved P1, P2, … and Pn , then their conjunction P1
 P2  … Pn is also proved or derived.

Rule 2: E- ( Eliminating )

E- : If P1  P2  … Pn then Pi ( 1  i  n)

Interpretation: If we have proved P1  P2  … Pn , then any Pi is also proved or derived. This

rule shows that  can be eliminated to yield one of its conjuncts.

Rule 3: I-V (Introducing V)

I-V : If Pi ( 1  i  n) then P1V P2 V …V Pn

Interpretation: If any Pi (1 i  n) is proved, then P1V …V Pn is also proved.

Rule 4: E-V ( Eliminating V)

E-V : If P1 V … V Pn, P1  P, … , Pn  P then P

Interpretation: If P1 V … V Pn, P1  P, … , and Pn  P are proved, then P is proved.

Rule 5: I-  (Introducing  )

I-  : If from 1, …, n infer  is proved then 1  … n   is proved

Interpretation: If given 1, 2, …and n to be proved and from these we deduce  then 1  2
… n   is also proved.

Rule 6: E-  (Eliminating  ) - Modus Ponen

E-  : If P1  P, P1 then P

Rule 7: I-  (Introducing  )

I-  : If P1  P2, P2  P1 then P1  P2

Rule 8: E-  (Elimination  )

Prepared by N Md Jubair basha, Associate. Professor, CSED,KHIT Page 6

www.Jntufastupdates.com
B.Tech. III Year CSE II Sem Artificial Intelligence Unit III

E-  : If P1  P2 then P1  P2 , P2  P1

Rule 9: I- ~ (Introducing ~)

I- ~ : If from P infer P1  ~ P1 is proved then ~P is proved

Rule 10: E- ~ (Eliminating ~)

E- ~ : If from ~ P infer P1  ~ P1 is proved then P is proved

● If a formula  is derived / proved from a set of premises / hypotheses { 1,…, n },

− then one can write it as from 1, …, n infer .

● In natural deductive system,

− a theorem to be proved should have a form from 1, …, n infer .

● Theorem infer  means that

− there are no premises and  is true under all interpretations i.e.,  is a tautology or
valid.

● If we assume that    is a premise, then we conclude that  is proved if  is given

i.e.,

− if ‘from  infer ’ is a theorem then    is concluded.

− The converse of this is also true.

Deduction Theorem: To prove a formula 1  2 …  n  , it is sufficient to prove a

theorem from 1, 2, …, n infer .

Example1: Prove that P(QVR) follows from PQ

Solution: This problem is restated in natural deductive system as "from P Q infer P  (Q V

R)". The formal proof is given as follows:

{Theorem} from P Q infer P  (Q V R)

{ premise} PQ (1)

{ E- , (1)} P (2)

{ E- , (1)} Q (3)

Prepared by N Md Jubair basha, Associate. Professor, CSED,KHIT Page 7

www.Jntufastupdates.com
B.Tech. III Year CSE II Sem Artificial Intelligence Unit III

{ I-V , (3) } QVR (4)

{ I-, ( 2, 4)} P  (Q V R) Conclusion

Example2: Prove the following theorem:

infer ((Q  P)  (Q  R))  (Q  (P  R))

Solution:

● In order to prove infer ((Q  P) (Q  R))  (Q  (P  R)), prove a theorem

from {Q  P, Q  R} infer Q  (P  R).

● Further, to prove Q  (P  R), prove a sub theorem from Q infer P R

{Theorem} from Q  P, Q  R infer Q  (P  R)

{ premise 1} Q P (1)

{ premise 2} Q  R (2)

{ sub theorem} from Q infer P  R (3)

{ premise } Q (3.1)

{ E-  , (1, 3.1) } P (3.2)

{E- , (2, 3.1) } R (3.3)

{ I-, (3.2,3.3) } P  R (3.4)

{ I- , ( 3 )} Q  (P  R) Conclusion

4. Axiomatic System for Propositional Logic:

● It is based on the set of only three axioms and one rule of deduction.

− It is minimal in structure but as powerful as the truth table and natural deduction
approaches.

− The proofs of the theorems are often difficult and require a guess in selection of
appropriate axiom(s) and rules.

− These methods basically require forward chaining strategy where we start with
the given hypotheses and prove the goal.

Prepared by N Md Jubair basha, Associate. Professor, CSED,KHIT Page 8

www.Jntufastupdates.com
B.Tech. III Year CSE II Sem Artificial Intelligence Unit III

Axiom1 (A1):   (  )

Axiom2 (A2): ( ()) ((  )  (  ))

Axiom3 (A3): (~   ~ )  (   )

Modus Ponen (MP) defined as follows:

Hypotheses:    and  Consequent: 

Examples: Establish the following:

1. {Q} |-(PQ) i.e., PQ is a deductive consequence of {Q}.

{Hypothesis} Q (1)

{Axiom A1} Q  (P  Q) (2)

{MP, (1,2)} P Q proved

2. { P  Q, Q  R } |- ( P  R ) i.e., P  R is a deductive consequence

of { P  Q, Q  R }.

{Hypothesis} P  Q (1)

{Hypothesis} Q  R (2)

{Axiom A1} (Q R)  (P  (Q  R)) (3)

{MP, (2, 3)} P  (Q  R) (4)

{Axiom A2} (P  (Q  R)) 

((P  Q)  (P  R)) (5)

{MP , (4, 5)} (P  Q)  (P  R) (6)

{MP, (1, 6)} P  R proved

Prepared by N Md Jubair basha, Associate. Professor, CSED,KHIT Page 9

www.Jntufastupdates.com
B.Tech. III Year CSE II Sem Artificial Intelligence Unit III

4.1.Deduction Theorems in Axiomatic System

Deduction Theorem:

If  is a set of hypotheses and  and  are well-formed formulae , then {   } |- 

implies  |- (   ).

Converse of deduction theorem:

Given  |- (   ),

we can prove {    } |- .

Useful Tips

1. Given , we can easily prove    for any well-formed formulae  and .

2. Useful tip

If    is to be proved, then include  in the set of hypotheses  and derive  from

the set {  }. Then using deduction theorem, we conclude   .

Example: Prove ~ P  (P  Q) using deduction theorem.

Proof: Prove {~ P} |- (P  Q) and

|- ~ P(PQ) follows from deduction theorem.

5. Semantic Tableaux System in PL

● Earlier approaches require

− construction of proof of a formula from given set of formulae and are called
direct methods.

● In semantic tableaux,

− the set of rules are applied systematically on a formula or set of formulae to

establish its consistency or inconsistency.

● Semantic tableau

− binary tree constructed by using semantic rules with a formula as a root

● Assume  and  be any two formulae.

Prepared by N Md Jubair basha, Associate. Professor, CSED,KHIT Page 10

www.Jntufastupdates.com
B.Tech. III Year CSE II Sem Artificial Intelligence Unit III

5.1. Semantic Tableaux Rules

Prepared by N Md Jubair basha, Associate. Professor, CSED,KHIT Page 11

www.Jntufastupdates.com
B.Tech. III Year CSE II Sem Artificial Intelligence Unit III

5.2.Consistency and Inconsistency

● If an atom P and ~ P appear on a same path of a semantic tableau,

− then inconsistency is indicated and such path is said to be contradictory or

closed (finished) path.

− Even if one path remains non contradictory or unclosed (open), then the formula
 at the root of a tableau is consistent.

● Contradictory tableau (or finished tableau):

− It defined to be a tableau in which all the paths are contradictory or closed

(finished).

● If a tableau for a formula  at the root is a contradictory tableau,

− then a formula  is said to be inconsistent.

Prepared by N Md Jubair basha, Associate. Professor, CSED,KHIT Page 12

www.Jntufastupdates.com
B.Tech. III Year CSE II Sem Artificial Intelligence Unit III

6. Resolution Refutation in PL

● Resolution refutation: Another simple method to prove a formula by contradiction.

● Here negation of goal is added to given set of clauses.

− If there is a refutation in new set using resolution principle then goal is proved

● During resolution we need to identify two clauses,

− one with positive atom (P) and other with negative atom (~ P) for the application
of resolution rule.

● Resolution is based on modus ponen inference rule.

6.1.Disjunctive & Conjunctive Normal Forms

● Disjunctive Normal Form (DNF): A formula in the form (L11  …..  L1n ) V ..… V
(Lm1  …..  Lmk ), where all Lij are literals.

− Disjunctive Normal Form is disjunction of conjunctions.

● Conjunctive Normal Form (CNF): A formula in the form (L11 V ….. V L1n )  …… 
(Lp1 V ….. V Lpm ) , where all Lij are literals.

Prepared by N Md Jubair basha, Associate. Professor, CSED,KHIT Page 13

www.Jntufastupdates.com
B.Tech. III Year CSE II Sem Artificial Intelligence Unit III

− CNF is conjunction of disjunctions or

− CNF is conjunction of clauses

● Clause: It is a formula of the form (L1V … V Lm), where each Lk is a positive or

negative atom.

6.2.Conversion of a Formula to its CNF

● Each PL formula can be converted into its equivalent CNF.

● Use following equivalence laws:

− P  Q  ~P V Q

− PQ  ( P  Q)  ( Q  P)

 Double Negation

− ~~P  P

 (De Morgan’s law)

− ~ ( P  Q)  ~ P V ~ Q

− ~ ( P V Q)  ~ P  ~ Q

 (Distributive law)

P V (Q  R)  (P V Q)  (P V R)

6.3Resolvent of Clauses

● If two clauses C1 and C2 contain a complementary pair of literals {L, ~L},

− then these clauses may be resolved together by deleting L from C1 and ~ L from
C2 and constructing a new clause by the disjunction of the remaining literals in C1
and C2.

● The new clause thus generated is called resolvent of C1 and C2 .

− Here C1 and C2 are called parents of resolved clause.

● Inverted binary tree is generated with the last node (root) of the binary tree to be a
resolvent.

This is also called resolution tree.

Prepared by N Md Jubair basha, Associate. Professor, CSED,KHIT Page 14

www.Jntufastupdates.com
B.Tech. III Year CSE II Sem Artificial Intelligence Unit III

6.4Logical Consequence

● Theorem1: If C is a resolvent of two clauses C1 and C2 , then C is a logical consequence

of {C1 , C2 }.

− A deduction of an empty clause (or resolvent as contradiction) from a set S of

clauses is called a resolution refutation of S.

● Theorem2: Let S be a set of clauses. A clause C is a logical consequence of S iff the

set S’= S  {~ C} is unsatisfiable.

− In other words, C is a logical consequence of a given set S iff an empty clause is

deduced from the set S'.

Prepared by N Md Jubair basha, Associate. Professor, CSED,KHIT Page 15

www.Jntufastupdates.com
B.Tech. III Year CSE II Sem Artificial Intelligence Unit III

Prepared by N Md Jubair basha, Associate. Professor, CSED,KHIT Page 16

www.Jntufastupdates.com