Knowledge representation

 Procedural Knowledge

 A representation in which the control information, to use the knowledge, embedded in the knowledge
itself. For example, computer programs, directions, and recipes; these indicate specific use or
implementation;
 Moreover, Knowledge encoded in some procedures, small programs that know how to do specific
things, how to proceed.
 Advantages:
 Heuristic or domain-specific knowledge can represent.
 Moreover, Extended logical inferences, such as default reasoning facilitated.
 Also, Side effects of actions may model. Some rules may become false in time. Keeping track of
this in large systems may be tricky.
 Disadvantages:
 Completeness — not all cases may represent.
 Consistency — not all deductions may be correct. e.g If we know that Fred is a bird we might
deduce that Fred can fly. Later we might discover that Fred is an emu.
 Modularity sacrificed. Changes in knowledge base might have far-reaching effects.
 Cumbersome control information.
 Declarative Knowledge
 A statement in which knowledge specified, but the use to which that knowledge is to be put is not
given.

 For example, laws, people’s name; these are the facts which can stand alone, not dependent on
other knowledge;

 So to use declarative representation, we must have a program that explains what is to do with the
knowledge and how.

 For example, a set of logical assertions can combine with a resolution theorem prover to give a
complete program for solving problems but in some cases, the logical assertions can view as a
program rather than data to a program.

 Hence the implication statements define the legitimate reasoning paths and automatic assertions
provide the starting points of those paths.

 These paths define the execution paths which is similar to the ‘if then else “in traditional
programming.

 So logical assertions can view as a procedural representation of knowledge.

 Procedural versus Declarative Knowledge

 We have discussed various search techniques in previous units. Now we would consider a set of rules
that represent,

1. Knowledge about relationships in the world and

2. Knowledge about how to solve the problem using the content of the rules.

 Procedural vs Declarative Knowledge

Procedural Knowledge


A representation in which the control information that is necessary to use the knowledge is embedded
in the knowledge itself for e.g. computer programs, directions, and recipes; these indicate specific use
or implementation;

 The real difference between declarative and procedural views of knowledge lies in where control
information reside.
 For example, consider the following

 Man (Marcus) Man (Caesar) Person

(Cleopatra)

 ∀x: Man(x) → Person(x)

 Now, try to answer the question. ?Person(y)

 The knowledge base justifies any of the

following answers.
 Y=Marcus Y=Caesar Y=Cleopatra

 We get more than one value that satisfies

the predicate.

 If only one value needed, then the answer to the question will depend on the order in which
the assertions examined during the search for a response.

 If the assertions declarative then they do not themselves say anything about how they will be
examined. In case of procedural representation, they say how they will examine.
 Declarative Knowledge

 A statement in which knowledge specified, but the use to which that knowledge is to be put is
not given.

 For example, laws, people’s name; these are the facts which can stand alone, not dependent
on other knowledge;

 So to use declarative representation, we must have a program that explains what is to do with
the knowledge and how.

 For example, a set of logical assertions can combine with a resolution theorem prover to give a
complete program for solving problems but in some cases, the logical assertions can view as a
program rather than data to a program.

 Hence the implication statements define the legitimate reasoning paths and automatic
assertions provide the starting points of those paths.

 These paths define the execution paths which is similar to the ‘if then else “in traditional
programming.

 So logical assertions can view as a procedural representation of knowledge.

Representations and Mappings

 In order to solve complex problems encountered in artificial intelligence, one

needs both a large amount of knowledge and some mechanism for
manipulating that knowledge to create solutions.

 Knowledge and Representation are two distinct entities. They play

central but distinguishable roles in the intelligent system.
 Knowledge is a description of the world. It determines a system’s competence
by what it knows.

 Moreover, Representation is the way knowledge is encoded. It defines a

system’s performance in doing something.

 Different types of knowledge require different kinds of representation.

 Fig: Mapping between Facts and Representations
 The Knowledge Representation models/mechanisms are often based on:
 Logic
 Rules
 Frames
 Semantic Net
 Knowledge is categorized into two major types:

1. Tacit corresponds to “informal” or “implicit“

 Exists within a human being;

 It is embodied.

 Difficult to articulate formally.

 Difficult to communicate or share.

 Moreover, Hard to steal or copy.

 Drawn from experience, action, subjective insight

2. Explicit formal type of knowledge, Explicit

 Explicit knowledge

 Exists outside a human being;

 It is embedded.

 Can be articulated formally.

 Also, Can be shared, copied, processed and stored.

 So, Easy to steal or copy


  A variety of ways of representing knowledge have been exploited in AI programs.

 There are two different kinds of entities, we are dealing with.

1. Facts: Truth in some relevant world. Things we want to represent.

2. Also, Representation of facts in some chosen formalism. Things we will actually be able to
manipulate.

 These entities structured at two levels:

1. The knowledge level, at which facts described.

2. Moreover, The symbol level, at which representation of objects defined in terms of symbols
that can manipulate by programs
 Framework of Knowledge Representation

 The computer requires a well-defined problem description to process and provide a well-
defined acceptable solution.


Moreover, To collect fragments of knowledge we need first to formulate a description in our
spoken language and then represent it in formal language so that computer can understand.
Fig: Knowledge Representation Framework
The steps are:
 The informal formalism of the problem takes place first.
 It then represented formally and the computer produces an output.
 This output can then represented in an informally described solution that user understands or checks
for consistency.
The Problem solving requires,
 Formal knowledge representation, and
 Moreover, Conversion of informal knowledge to a formal knowledge that is the conversion of
implicit knowledge to explicit knowledge.
 Mapping between Facts and Representation

 Knowledge is a collection of facts from some domain.

 Also, We need a representation of “facts“ that can manipulate by a program.

 Moreover, Normal English is insufficient, too hard currently for a computer program to draw
inferences in natural languages.

 Thus some symbolic representation is necessary.

 A good knowledge representation enables fast and accurate access to knowledge and understanding of the
content.

 A knowledge representation system should have following properties.

1. Representational Adequacy
 The ability to represent all kinds of knowledge that are needed in that domain.

2. Inferential Adequacy

 Also, The ability to manipulate the representational structures to derive new structures
corresponding to new knowledge inferred from old.
3.Inferential Efficiency

 The ability to incorporate additional information into the knowledge structure that can be used to
focus the attention of the inference mechanisms in the most promising direction.

4.Acquisitional Efficiency

 Moreover, The ability to acquire new knowledge using automatic methods wherever possible
rather than reliance on human intervention.
 Knowledge Representation Schemes Relational Knowledge

 The simplest way to represent declarative facts is a set of relations of the same sort used in the
database system.

 Provides a framework to compare two objects based on equivalent attributes. o Any instance in
which two different objects are compared is a relational type of knowledge.

 The table below shows a simple way to store facts.

 Also, The facts about a set of objects are put systematically in columns.
 This representation provides little opportunity for inference

 Given the facts, it is not possible to answer a simple question such as: “Who
is the heaviest player?”

 Also, But if a procedure for finding the heaviest player is provided, then these
facts will enable that procedure to compute an answer.

 Moreover, We can ask things like who “bats – left” and “throws – right”.
 Inheritable Knowledge

 Here the knowledge elements inherit attributes from their parents.

 The knowledge embodied in the design hierarchies found in the functional, physical and process
domains.

 Within the hierarchy, elements inherit attributes from their parents, but in many cases, not all
attributes of the parent elements prescribed to the child elements.

 Also, The inheritance is a powerful form of inference, but not adequate.

 Moreover, The basic KR (Knowledge Representation) needs to augment with inference mechanism.

 Property inheritance: The objects or elements of specific classes inherit attributes and values from
more general classes.

 So, The classes organized in a generalized hierarchy.

  Boxed nodes — objects and values of attributes of objects.

 Arrows — the point from object to its value.

 This structure is known as a slot and filler structure,

semantic network or a collection of frames.

 The steps to retrieve a value for an attribute of an instance object:

1. Find the object in the knowledge base

2. If there is a value for the attribute report it

3. Otherwise look for a value of an instance, if none fail

4. Also, Go to that node and find a value for the attribute and then report it

5. Otherwise, search through using is until a value is found for the attribute.


 This knowledge generates new information from the given information.

 This new information does not require further data gathering form source but does require analysis of the

given information to generate new knowledge.

 Example: given a set of relations and values, one may infer other values or relations. A predicate logic (a

mathematical deduction) used to infer from a set of attributes. Moreover, Inference through predicate logic

uses a set of logical operations to relate individual data.

 Represent knowledge as formal logic: All dogs have tails ∀x: dog(x) → hastail(x)

 Advantages:

 A set of strict rules.

 Can use to derive more facts.

 Also, Truths of new statements can be verified.

 Guaranteed correctness.

 So, Many inference procedures available to implement standard rules of logic popular in AI systems. e.g

Automated theorem proving.

 Logic Programming – Representing Knowledge Using Rules

 Logic programming is a programming paradigm in which logical assertions viewed as programs.

 These are several logic programming systems, PROLOG is one of them.

 A PROLOG program consists of several logical assertions where each is a horn clause

 i.e. a clause with at most one positive literal.

 Ex : P, P V Q, P → Q

 The facts are represented on Horn Clause for two reasons.

1. Because of a uniform representation, a simple and efficient interpreter can write.

2. The logic of Horn Clause decidable.


Also, The first two differences are the fact that PROLOG programs are actually sets of Horn clause that have
been transformed as follows:-

1. If the Horn Clause contains no negative literal then leave it as it is.

2. Also, Otherwise rewrite the Horn clauses as an implication, combining all of the negative literals into the
antecedent of the implications and the single positive literal into the consequent.
 Moreover, This procedure causes a clause which originally consisted of a disjunction
of literals (one of them was positive) to be transformed into a single implication
whose antecedent is a conjunction universally quantified.

 But when we apply this transformation, any variables that occurred in negative literals
and so now occur in the antecedent become existentially quantified, while the
variables in the consequent are still universally quantified.
 For example the PROLOG clause P(x): – Q(x, y) is equal to logical expression ∀x:
∃y: Q (x, y) → P(x).

 The difference between the logic and PROLOG representation is that the PROLOG
interpretation has a fixed control strategy. And so, the assertions in the PROLOG
program define a particular search path to answer any question.

 But, the logical assertions define only the set of answers but not about how to choose
among those answers if there is more than one.
 Consider the following example:

1. Logical representation
 ∀x : pet(x) ۸ small (x) → apartmentpet(x)

 ∀x : cat(x) ۸ dog(x) → pet(x)

∀x : poodle (x) → dog (x) ۸ small (x) poodle
(fluffy)

1. Prolog representation

 apartmentpet (x) : pet(x), small (x) pet (x): cat (x)

 pet (x): dog(x)

dog(x): poodle (x) small (x): poodle(x)

poodle (fluffy)
Forward versus Backward Reasoning

 Forward versus Backward Reasoning

 A search procedure must find a path between initial and goal states. There are
two directions in which a search process could proceed. The two types of
search are:

1. Forward search which starts from the start state

2. Backward search that starts from the goal state

 The production system views the forward and backward as symmetric processes.
Consider a game of playing 8 puzzles. The rules defined are

 Square 1 empty and square 2 contains tile n. →


Also, Square 2 empty and square 1 contains the tile n. Square 1 empty
Square 4 contains tile n. →

 Also, Square 4 empty and Square 1 contains tile n.

 We can solve the problem in 2 ways:

1. Reason forward from the initial state

 Step 1. Begin building a tree of move sequences by starting with the initial configuration at the root
of the tree.

 Step 2. Generate the next level of the tree by finding all rules whose left-hand side matches
against the root node. The right-hand side is used to create new configurations.

 Step 3. Generate the next level by considering the nodes in the previous level and applying it
to all rules whose left-hand side match.

2. Reasoning backward from the goal states:

 Step 1. Begin building a tree of move sequences by starting with the goal node
configuration at the root of the tree.

 Step 2. Generate the next level of the tree by finding all rules whose right-hand side matches
against the root node. The left-hand side used to create new configurations.

 Step 3. Generate the next level by considering the nodes in the previous level and applying it
to all rules whose right-hand side match.
  So, The same rules can use in both cases.

 Also, In forwarding reasoning, the left-hand sides of the rules matched against the current state and
right sides used to generate the new state.

 Moreover, In backward reasoning, the right-hand sides of the rules matched against the current
state and left sides are used to generate the new state.

 There are four factors influencing the type of reasoning. They are,
1. Are there more possible start or goal state? We move from smaller set of sets to the length.

2. In what direction is the branching factor greater? We proceed in the direction with the lower
branching factor.

3. Will the program be asked to justify its reasoning process to a user? If, so then it is selected since it
is very close to the way in which the user thinks.

4. What kind of event is going to trigger a problem-solving episode? If it is the arrival of a new factor, the
forward reasoning makes sense. If it is a query to which a response is desired, backward reasoning is
more natural.
Example 1 of Forward versus Backward Reasoning
 It is easier to drive from an unfamiliar place to home, rather than from home
to an unfamiliar place. Also, If you consider a home as starting place an
unfamiliar place as a goal then we have to backtrack from unfamiliar place to
home.

Example 2 of Forward versus Backward Reasoning

 Consider a problem of symbolic integration. Moreover, The problem space is a set
of formulas, which contains integral expressions. Here START is equal to the given
formula with some integrals.
 GOAL is equivalent to the expression of the formula without any integral. Here we
start from the formula with some integrals and proceed to an integral free
expression rather than starting from an integral free expression
 Example 3 of Forward versus Backward Reasoning

The third factor is nothing but deciding whether the reasoning process can
justify its reasoning. If it justifies then it can apply. For example, doctors are
usually unwilling to accept any advice from diagnostics process because it
cannot explain its reasoning.

 Example 4 of Forward versus Backward Reasoning

 Prolog is an example of backward chaining rule system. In Prolog rules restricted

to Horn clauses. This allows for rapid indexing because all the rules for deducing
a given fact share the same rule head. Rules matched with unification procedure.

 Unification tries to find a set of bindings for variables to equate a sub-goal with
the head of some rule. Rules in the Prolog program matched in the order in which
they appear.
 Combining Forward and Backward Reasoning

 Instead of searching either forward or backward, you can search both simultaneously.

 Also, That is, start forward from a starting state and backward from a goal
state simultaneously until the paths meet.

 This strategy called Bi-directional search. The following figure shows the reason
for a Bidirectional search to be ineffective
Forward versus Backward Reasoning
 Also, The two searches may pass each other resulting in more work.
 Based on the form of the rules one can decide whether the same rules can
apply to both forward and backward reasoning.
 Moreover, If left-hand side and right of the rule contain pure assertions then the
rule can reverse.
 And so the same rule can apply to both types of reasoning.
 If the right side of the rule contains an arbitrary procedure then the rule cannot
reverse.
 So, In this case, while writing the rule the commitment to a direction of
reasoning must make.