Anyone good at AI Theory?

[CnCGOD]

I am taking a course on AI and this class has me flummoxed. I am terrible at logical proofs and such and this shit takes the cake.

Huge +internets for anyone who can help with the following within 6hrs(the A at the begging for the knowlege base is that upside down A thingy):

Assume the following partial knowledge base for natural numbers:
Ax : Plus(x, 0, x)
Ax, y, z : Plus(x, y, z) ) Plus(x, s(y), s(z))
Ax : Minus(x, 0, x)
Ax, y, z : Minus(x, y, s(z)) ) Minus(x, s(y), z)
Ax, y : Minus(0, s(y),NULL)
Note that there are two special constants, 0 and NULL (NULL means that the result is not
a natural number). There is 1 function, s (with one argument). There are 2 predicates, one
that corresponds to a normal ”+”, and one that corresponds to a normal ”-”.
1
Show that
a) Plus(s(0), s(s(0)), s(s(s(0)))), i.e. 1+2 = 3
b) Minus(s(s(0)), s(0), s(0)), i.e. 2-1=1
You can use any inference method (e.g. resolution for first-order logic), but make sure your
proof is solid. Always show what rule you used, and if you used unification, show the used
most general unifier.

[Tenks]

Maybe I won't get that masters of AI that I've been eyeballing

[simeon]

AI Theory?
Anyone who has any idea of first order logic should be able to hammer this out. I'm assuming you're taking an AI course and they're going to have you use Prolog, thus this is an introduction to the skills you need to successfully do your assignments.

If you still need the help, I'll take a look at it when I get home.

[CnCGOD]

Yea its a standalone AI course, and hes hammering first order logic to a bunch of computer science students (its a masters level CS course) without the background to know wtf is going on. Its so far from any of my experience/strengths that the basics make me want to scream. I took discrete math like 7-8years ago and remember 0 from it. I could never do proofs in math worth a damn, just bombed those and got everything else right. I hate formal logic and either I have formed a block or my mind works so differently that it makes no sense lol. I am the type to get to the solution intuativly without some formal process and doing the process is harder than getting to the solution for me.

The odd thing is we are over 1/2 way through the class and there seems to be no plans to do prolog , I just want to get a B so my company pays for the course and forget everything asap as it has 0 value in my field.
Of course that is going to be hard to do as the class average is 62% and I am hovering just above that.


The help would be to late for the homework but it could help me know wtf to do on the test so would still appreciate the help.

[Fog]

You should probably post this on the general forum or in another place altogether. That said, for the first proof, the outline of what you want to do will be something like this:

- Take the first theorem, specify X as s(0), yielding Plus(s(0), 0, s(0))
- Apply the second theorem, which implies Plus(s(0), s(0), s(s(0)))
- Apply the second theorem again, which implies Plus(s(0), s(s(0)), s(s(s(0))))
- QED

And for the second proof, something like this:

- Take the third theorem, specify X as s(s(0)), yielding Minus(s(s(0)), 0, s(s(0)))
- Apply the fourth theorem, which implies Minus(s(s(0)), s(0), s(0))
- QED

Formalize as necessary. By the way, this is supposed to be the intuitive part.

[CnCGOD]

Thanks fog, I think I see whats going on better now... the way our professor words shit is terrible.

[ToeMissile]

Originally Posted by CnCGOD

Thanks fog, I think I see whats going on better now... the way our professor words shit is terrible.

At least he isn't an Indian version of Milton from Office Space...

[CnCGOD]

lol

[lendarios]

Prolog class was for me one of the hardest one i took. Im good at logic proofs but the excess numbers of parenthesis of prolog always threw me off. Im glad i dont have to work with that at all. All you need to know is Boolean algebra.

[Luthair]

Originally Posted by lendarios

Prolog class was for me one of the hardest one i took. Im good at logic proofs but the excess numbers of parenthesis of prolog always threw me off. Im glad i dont have to work with that at all. All you need to know is Boolean algebra.

There are barely any parenthesis in prolog.