Inference in First Order Logic (FOL) and Unification

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 30 вер 2024
  • Introduction to inference in FOL and unification (no unification algorithm is offered, but the idea is discussed).

КОМЕНТАРІ • 24

  • @AvroStrategies
    @AvroStrategies 8 років тому +35

    Best explanation I've come across - struggled with these concepts from the book (Russell & Norvig - v.3) and reviewed a few other videos. No one else does such a simple but excellent job!! Thanks.

  • @Bonvivant9
    @Bonvivant9 8 років тому +9

    Great video, you did a great job explaining these concepts. I'm also using R&N's book for my AI class.

  • @ButiLao44
    @ButiLao44 2 роки тому +1

    Is there anyone out there who uses a different example than the evil greedy kings John and Richard? :D

  • @apurvamisaki
    @apurvamisaki 9 років тому +4

    nicely explained! since you used Russel - Norvig book as the reference it made it easier to understand. thanks! keep up the good work!

  • @xtree2817
    @xtree2817 5 років тому +4

    thank you so much for saving my day.........

  • @nishitpatel5686
    @nishitpatel5686 2 роки тому +2

    you are doing great job keep it up!
    your content is very reliable and useful

  • @carelhaasbroek1575
    @carelhaasbroek1575 2 роки тому +1

    Watching this an hour before my AI test.
    RIP

  • @2NDS0N
    @2NDS0N 2 роки тому +1

    Is there a reason why this video "Inference in First Order Logic (FOL) and Unification" and your "Forward and BackwardChaining" video are not a part of your "AI" playlist?

  • @tomarintomarin9520
    @tomarintomarin9520 5 років тому +1

    better then my professor at Um**h

  • @guntejghuman3464
    @guntejghuman3464 2 роки тому

    can someone help me answer this
    Show that the following two sentences are not equivalent in FOL
    ¬∀x(A(x) → ¬B(x)), ∀x(A(x) → B(x))

  • @TheAusrali
    @TheAusrali 2 роки тому

    its ironic because you logically misused "x" when writing the statements. if you define as x being an object of human characteristics (which means it can be an american), you can't use it in Missile(x) lol you're gonna get a bunch of people confused. you had bound x/M1 and x/Nono, you're not supposed to be able to do that.

  • @RaselAhmed-ix5ee
    @RaselAhmed-ix5ee 3 роки тому

    Using First Order Logic to represent the following statements, prove that Rose and James are cousins.
    Ron and Ginny are siblings. Ginny is married to Harry. James is Harry’s son. Lily is Ginny’s daughter. Rose is Ron’s daughter. Arthur is Ginny’s father.
    help me pls for the answere

  • @devanshusachdev7367
    @devanshusachdev7367 4 роки тому

    Can we say that there are two ways of inferring in FOL:
    1. Reduction to propositional logic and using propositional inference rules
    2. Approaches based on unification and generalized Modus Ponens, which are:
    2.1 Forward chaining
    2.2 backward chaining
    2.3 Resolution
    Is it correct classification for the approaches to infer in FOL?

  • @ProEray
    @ProEray 3 роки тому

    Hi, thanks for the video, pretty clear. One question though: Shouldn't there be a universal quantifier in the sentence R1?

  • @bahar4813
    @bahar4813 4 роки тому

    Thank you so much🙏🏻🙏🏻 It was perfect

  • @hoangnguyen487
    @hoangnguyen487 8 років тому

    where can i find your pdf/slides?

  • @sreejasree7427
    @sreejasree7427 3 роки тому

    Thank you sir

  • @zwarasevski123
    @zwarasevski123 4 роки тому

    thank you

  • @tore7711
    @tore7711 3 роки тому

    Thank you

  • @derekdj6790
    @derekdj6790 5 років тому

    Thank you so much