1. for-every x, exists y: son(x) = yIn your answers, any "not" may only appear after the last appearance of a universal or existential quantifier.
2. for-every x, for-every y: son(x) = y <=> father(y) = x
Answer:
1. exists x, for every y: son(x) != y
2. exists x, exists y: not (son(x) = y <=> father(y) = x)
Answer for exercise 8.8 in the 2nd edition:
There is an extra axiom needed:
(Male(x) and Spouse(x, y)) => Female(y)
Answer for exercise 8.8 in the 3nd edition:
No, not(Spouse(George, Laura)) does not follow from the given facts. We need the additional axiom:
(Spouse(x, y) and (z != x)) => not(Spouse(z, y))If Spouse becomes a unary function, then no additional axiom is needed. Then, the facts would be written as:
Jim != Georgeand the statement not(Spouse(Laura) = George) can be proven as follows:
Spouse(Laura) = Jim
((Spouse(Laura) = Jim) and (Jim != George)) => not(Spouse(Laura) = George)If Spouse is a function, then it can only return a single value for each argument (such as Laura).
KB 1:
for-every x: king(x) and greedy(x) => evil(x)
king(John)
greedy(John)
brother(Richard, John)
KB 2:
for-every x: king(x) and greedy(x) => evil(x)
king(John)
greedy(John)
brother(Richard, John)
king(father(John))
Answer:
For KB1, propositionalization can be applied successfully because there are no functions. For KB2, propositionalization cannot be applied successfully because there are functions.
Answer:
(a): (A) becomes: for every natural number x there exists a natural
number y such that x is greater than or equal to y.
(B) becomes: there exists a natural number y such that every natural
number x is greater than or equal to y.
(b): (A) is true: any natural number is >= 0.
(c): (B) is true: If y = 0, then any natural number x is greater than
or equal to 0.