Structured Knowledge

Chapter 7
 Logic Notations

Does logic represent well knowledge in structures?

2
 Logic Notations

Frege’s Begriffsschrift (concept writing) - 1879:

assert P P

not P P

if P then Q Q
P
for every x, P(x) x P(x)

3
 Logic Notations

Frege’s Begriffsschrift (concept writing) - 1879:

“Every ball is red” x red(x)

ball(x)

“Some ball is red” x red(x)

ball(x)

4
 Logic Notations

Algebraic notation - Peirce, 1883:

Universal quantifier: ΠxPx

Existential quantifier: ∑xPx

5
 Logic Notations

Algebraic notation - Peirce, 1883:

“Every ball is red”: ∏x(ballx —< redx)

“Some ball is red”: ∑x(ballx • redx)

6
 Logic Notations

Peano’s and later notation:

“Every ball is red”: (∀x)(ball(x) ⊃ red(x))

“Some ball is red”: (∃x)(ball(x) ∧ red(x))

7
 Logic Notations

Existential graphs - Peirce, 1897:

Existential quantifier: a link structure of bars, called line of
identity, represents ∃

Conjunction: the juxtaposition of two graphs represents ∧

Negation: an oval enclosure represents ~

8
 Logic Notations

“If a farmer owns a donkey, then he beats it”:

farmer owns donkey

beats

9
 Logic Notations

EG’s rules of inferences:

Erasure: in a positive context, any graph may be erased.
Insertion: in a negative context, any graph may be inserted.
Iteration: a copy of a graph may be written in the same
context or any nested context.
Deiteration: any graph may be erased if a copy of its occurs
in the same context or a containing context.
Double negation: two negations with nothing between them
may be erased or inserted.

10
 Existential Graphs
Prove: ((p ⇒ r) ∧ (q ⇒ s)) ⇒ ((p q) ⇒ (r s)) is valid

11
 Existential Graphs
Prove: ((p ⇒ r) ∧ (q ⇒ s)) ⇒ ((p q) ⇒ (r s)) is valid

p r q s

p q r s

12
 Existential Graphs
Prove: ((p ⇒ r) ∧ (q ⇒ s)) ⇒ ((p q) ⇒ (r s))
Erasure: in a positive context,
any graph may be erased.
Insertion: in a negative context,
any graph may be inserted.
Iteration: a copy of a graph may
be written in the same context or
any nested context.
Deiteration:
Deiteration: any graph may be
erased if a copy of its occurs in
the same context or a containing
context.
Double negation: two negations
with nothing between them may
be erased or inserted.
13
 Existential Graphs
Prove: ((p ⇒ r) ∧ (q ⇒ s)) ⇒ ((p q) ⇒ (r s))
Erasure: in a positive context,
any graph may be erased.
Insertion: in a negative context,
any graph may be inserted.
Iteration: a copy of a graph may
be written in the same context or
any nested context.
Deiteration:
Deiteration: any graph may be
erased if a copy of its occurs in p r q s
the same context or a containing
context.
Double negation: two negations
with nothing between them may
be erased or inserted.
14
 Existential Graphs
Prove: ((p ⇒ r) ∧ (q ⇒ s)) ⇒ ((p q) ⇒ (r s))
Erasure: in a positive context,
any graph may be erased. p r q s
Insertion: in a negative context,
any graph may be inserted.
Iteration: a copy of a graph may
be written in the same context or
any nested context.
Deiteration:
Deiteration: any graph may be
erased if a copy of its occurs in
the same context or a containing
context. p r q s
Double negation: two negations
with nothing between them may
be erased or inserted. p r
15
 Existential Graphs
Prove: ((p ⇒ r) ∧ (q ⇒ s)) ⇒ ((p q) ⇒ (r s))
Erasure: in a positive context,
any graph may be erased. p r q s
Insertion: in a negative context,
any graph may be inserted.
Iteration: a copy of a graph may p r
be written in the same context or
any nested context.
Deiteration:
Deiteration: any graph may be
erased if a copy of its occurs in
the same context or a containing p r q s
context.
Double negation: two negations
with nothing between them may p q r
be erased or inserted.
16
 Existential Graphs
Prove: ((p ⇒ r) ∧ (q ⇒ s)) ⇒ ((p q) ⇒ (r s))

Erasure: in a positive context,

any graph may be erased. p r q s
Insertion: in a negative context,
any graph may be inserted.
p q r
Iteration: a copy of a graph may
be written in the same context or
any nested context.
Deiteration:
Deiteration: any graph may be
erased if a copy of its occurs in
p r q s
the same context or a containing
context.
Double negation: two negations
with nothing between them may pq r q s
be erased or inserted.
17
 Existential Graphs
Prove: ((p ⇒ r) ∧ (q ⇒ s)) ⇒ ((p q) ⇒ (r s))

Erasure: in a positive context,

any graph may be erased.
p r q s
Insertion: in a negative context,
any graph may be inserted.
Iteration: a copy of a graph may
be written in the same context or pq r q s
any nested context.
Deiteration:
Deiteration: any graph may be
erased if a copy of its occurs in p r q s
the same context or a containing
context.
Double negation: two negations
with nothing between them may
p q r s
be erased or inserted.
18
 Existential Graphs
Prove: ((p ⇒ r) ∧ (q ⇒ s)) ⇒ ((p q) ⇒ (r s))

p r q s p r q s

p r

p r q s

p r q s p r q s
p q r s

p q r
pq r q s

19
 Existential Graphs

• α-graphs: propositional logic

• β-graphs: first-order logic
• γ-graphs: high-order and modal logic

20
 Semantic Nets

• Since the late 1950s dozens of different versions of

semantic networks have been proposed, with various
terminologies and notations.

• The main ideas:

For representing knowledge in structures
The meaning of a concept comes from the ways it is
connected to other concepts
Labelled nodes representing concepts are connected by
labelled arcs representing relations

21
 Semantic Nets

Mammal

isa
has-part
Person Nose

uniform instance
color team
Red Owen Liverpool

person(Owen) ≡ instance(Owen, Person)

team(Owen, Liverpool)

22
Semantic Nets

John Bill

height height
greater-than
H1 H2

value

1.80

23
 Semantic Nets

“John gives Mary a book”

Give Book
instance instance
agent object
John g b
beneficiary
give(John, Mary, book)
Mary

24
 Frames

• A vague paradigm - to organize knowledge in high-

level structures

• “A Framework for Representing Knowledge” - Minsky,

1974

• Knowledge is encoded in packets, called frames

(single frames in a film)

Frame name + slots

25
 Frames
Animals
Alive T
Flies F

isa

Birds Mammals
Legs 2 Legs 4
Flies T

isa

Penguins Cats Bats

Flies F Legs 2
Flies T

instance

Opus Bill Pat

Name Opus Name Bill Name Pat
Friend Friend
26
 Frames

Hybrid systems:
Frame component: to define terminologies (predicates and
terms)

Predicate calculus component: to describe individual objects and

rules

27
 Conceptual Graphs

• Sowa, J.F. 1984. Conceptual Structures: Information

Processing in Mind and Machine.
• CG = a combination of Perice’s EGs and semantic
networks.

28
 Conceptual Graphs

• 1968: term paper to Marvin Minsky at Harvard.

• 1970's: seriously working on CGs
• 1976: first paper on CGs
• 1981-1982: meeting with Norman Foo,
finding Peirce’s EGs
• 1984: the book coming out
• CG homepage: http://conceptualgraphs.org/

29
 Simple Conceptual Graphs

concept concept relation relation type

type (class)

1 2
CAT: tuna On MAT: *

individual referent generic referent

30
 Ontology

• Ontology: the study of "being" or existence

• An ontology = "A catalog of types of things that are
assumed to exist in a domain of interest" (Sowa, 2000)
• An ontology = "The arrangement of kinds of things
into types and categories with a well-defined
structure" (Passin 2004)

31
Ontology
top-level
categories

domain-specific

32
 Ontology
Aristotle's categories Being

Substance Accident

Property Relation

Inherence Directedness Containment

Quality Quantity Movement Intermediacy Spatial Temporal

Activity Passivity Having Situated

33
 Ontology
Geographical categories Geographical-Feature

Area Point Line

Block Dam On-Land On-Water

Terrain Town Road

Country Bridge Border River

Wetland Airstrip Railroad

Mountain Heliport Power-Line

34
 Ontology

Relation

35
 Ontology

Relation

36
 Ontology

ANIMAL
Eat
FOOD

PERSON: john Eat CAKE: *

37
 CG Projection

1 2
PERSON: john Has-Relative PERSON: *

1 2
PERSON: john Has-Wife WOMAN: mary

38
 Nested Conceptual Graphs

Neg CAT: tuna On MAT: *

¬
CAT: tuna On MAT: *

It is not true that cat Tuna is on a mat.

39
 Nested Conceptual Graphs

¬
¬
CAT: * CAT: * On MAT: *

coreference link

Every cat is on a mat.

40
 Nested Conceptual Graphs

Poss PERSON: julian Fly-To PLANET: mars

Past

Julian could not fly to Mars.

41
 Nested Conceptual Graphs

Poss PERSON: julian Fly-To PLANET: mars

Past

Tom believes that Mary wants to marry a sailor.

42
 Exercises

• Reading:
Sowa, J.F. 2000. Knowledge Representation: Logical,
Philosophical, and Computational Foundations (Section 1.1:
history of logic).

Way, E.C. 1994. Conceptual Graphs – Past, Present, and

Future. Procs. of ICCS'94.

43