Proof by contradiction - artificial intelligence, Computer Engineering

Proof by Contradiction - Artificial intelligence

So, both backward chaining andforward chaining have drawbacks. Another approach is to think regarding proving theorems by contradiction. These are so much common in mathematics: mathematicians specify some axioms, and then make an assumption. After some complexes mathematics, they have proven that an axiom is  false  (or  something  derived  from  the  axioms  which  did  not  involve  the assumption is false). As the axioms are irrefutably right, this means that the assumption they made might be false. That is, the assumption is not consistent with the axioms of the theory. To utilize this for a specific theorem which they want to prove is true; they negate the theorem statement and use this as the assumption they are going to display is false. As the negated theorem must be false, their original theorem ought to be true.

We may program our reasoning agents to do just the similar.Therefore, to specify this as a search problem, we need to say that the axioms of our theory and the negation of the theorem we want to prove are the starting search states. Recalling our example in section, to do this, we have to derive the false statement to show inconsistency, that the reason that the False statement becomes our goal. So, if we can deduce the false statement from our axioms, the theorem we were attempting to prove will certainly have been proven. This means that, not only can we use all our rules of inference; we also have goal to aim for.

As an instance, below is the input to the Otter theorem proves for the trivial theorem regarding Socrates being mortal. Otter searches for contradictions by using resolution, hence we notice that the theorem statement that Socrates is mortal is negated  byusing the minus sign.

Input:

set(auto). formula_list(usable).

all x (man(x)->mortal(x)). % for all x, if x is man then x is mortal

man(socrates). % Socrates is man

-mortal(socrates).        % Socrates is immortal (note: negated)

end_of_list.

Otter has no problem whatsoever proving this theorem, and output is following:

Output:

 PROOF

1 [] -man(x)|mortal(x).

2 [] -mortal(socrates).

3 [] man(socrates).

4 [hyper,3,1] mortal(socrates).

5 [binary,4.1,2.1] $F.

Hence  proof

Posted Date: 10/2/2012 8:32:32 AM | Location : United States







Related Discussions:- Proof by contradiction - artificial intelligence, Assignment Help, Ask Question on Proof by contradiction - artificial intelligence, Get Answer, Expert's Help, Proof by contradiction - artificial intelligence Discussions

Write discussion on Proof by contradiction - artificial intelligence
Your posts are moderated
Related Questions
Specified  the code segment below and that n is the problem size, answer the following queries:   // . . . int sum = 0; if(x > 12){ for(int i = 1; i     for( i


how to become an ict enginer

Compare excess 3 codes and gray code. Ans. Excess 3 Codes 1. This is the other form of BCD code. All decimal digits are coded in 4 bit binary code. 2. The code

Analysis of Algorithms For this task, each student should do two things: An empirical analysis of the runtime and comparisons made for all algorithms as a function of input si

What is Reflection?  It extends the benefits of metadata by permitting developers to inspect and use it at runtime. For example, dynamically verify all the classes contained in

Multiple valued logics: Multiple valued logics, where altered types of truth value such as "unknown" are may be allowed. These have some of the particular advantages of fuzzy

Problem 1 (a) Explain the RAID system and explain all possible configurations. (b) Summarize design goals, features and specifications of the Linux ext2 file system. (c

What are the functions of dispatcher? There are four fuctions of dispatcher:- A)  Equal distribution of transaction load to the work processes.  B) Management of buffer a

A COCOMO model is :- COCOMO:- Constructive Cost Estimation Model.