Skip to main content

Lecture 4 Exercises

Laura Kovács

Problem 4.1

Consider a total well-founded ordering \succ on ground non-equality atoms, and use the same symbol for the induced literal ordering. Let CC and DD be ground clauses without equality literals, and let AA and BB denote the maximal atoms of CC and DD, respectively. Assume AA and BB are syntactically identical, that AA occurs negatively in CC, and that AA occurs only positively in DD. Show that CbagDC \succ_{\text{bag}} D.

Solution

Because AA and BB coincide, AA is the maximal atom of DD. Since AA occurs only positively in DD, every other literal LL in DD satisfies ¬AA¬LL\neg A \succ A \succ \neg L \succ L in the induced literal ordering. By properties of the multiset (bag) extension, this implies ¬AbagD\neg A \succ_{\text{bag}} D.

In CC, AA appears only negatively, so ¬A\neg A is a literal of CC. Moreover ¬AA\neg A \succ A, and for every other atom CiC_i in CC we have ¬A¬CiCi\neg A \succ \neg C_i \succ C_i, meaning ¬A\neg A is the maximal literal of CC. Since the bag extension is monotone with respect to replacing the maximal element, the facts that ¬AbagD\neg A \succ_{\text{bag}} D and that ¬A\neg A is the maximal literal of CC together yield CbagDC \succ_{\text{bag}} D.

Problem 4.2

Let 1\succ_1 and 2\succ_2 be strict well-founded orderings over M1M_1 and M2M_2, respectively. Define an ordering \succ^* on M1×M2M_1 \times M_2 by

(a1,a2)(b1,b2)(a11b1 or (a1=b1 and a22b2)).(a_1,a_2) \succ^* (b_1,b_2) \Longleftrightarrow \big(a_1 \succ_1 b_1 \text{ or } (a_1 = b_1 \text{ and } a_2 \succ_2 b_2)\big).

Show that \succ^* is well-founded.

Solution

Assume for contradiction that \succ^* admits an infinite descending chain

(x0,y0)(x1,y1)(x2,y2).(x_0, y_0) \succ^* (x_1, y_1) \succ^* (x_2, y_2) \succ^* \cdots.

For each step either the first component strictly decreases in 1\succ_1 or stays equal. Because 1\succ_1 is well-founded, the sequence {xi}\{x_i\} has a minimal element xnx_n, so xi=xi+1x_i = x_{i+1} for all ini \ge n. The definition of \succ^* then forces yi2yi+1y_i \succ_2 y_{i+1} for every ini \ge n, contradicting well-foundedness of 2\succ_2. Hence \succ^* is well-founded.

Problem 4.3

Let \succ be a total well-founded ordering on ground atoms p1,,p6p_1, \dots, p_6 with p6p5p4p3p2p1p_6 \succ p_5 \succ p_4 \succ p_3 \succ p_2 \succ p_1. Consider the bag extension of \succ, still denoted by \succ. Compare the clauses

p6¬p6,¬p2p4p5,p2p3p_6 \vee \neg p_6,\qquad \neg p_2 \vee p_4 \vee p_5,\qquad p_2 \vee p_3

under this ordering.

Solution

Totality implies pipjp_i \succ p_j and pi¬pjp_i \succ \neg p_j whenever i>ji > j, so in particular p6¬p2p_6 \succ \neg p_2, p6p4p_6 \succ p_4, p6p5p_6 \succ p_5, and p5p2,p3p_5 \succ p_2, p_3. The bag ordering respects strict inclusion: if bag BB properly contains BB', then BBB \succ B', hence p6¬p6p6p_6 \vee \neg p_6 \succ p_6 and ¬p2p4p5p5\neg p_2 \vee p_4 \vee p_5 \succ p_5. Combining these comparisons yields

p6¬p6p6¬p2p4p5p5p2p3,p_6 \vee \neg p_6 \succ p_6 \succ \neg p_2 \vee p_4 \vee p_5 \succ p_5 \succ p_2 \vee p_3,

and therefore

p6¬p6¬p2p4p5p2p3.p_6 \vee \neg p_6 \succ \neg p_2 \vee p_4 \vee p_5 \succ p_2 \vee p_3.

Problem 4.4

Show that positive factoring in binary resolution BR\mathbb{BR} can be represented using inference steps of the superposition calculus.

Solution

Ignore selection functions. The positive factoring rule is

ppCpC(BR).\frac{p \lor p \lor C}{p \lor C}(BR).

Encode non-equality literals as equalities to a dedicated constant \top. Then factoring corresponds to the superposition steps

p=p=Cp=C(EF),\frac{p = \top \lor p = \top \lor C}{p = \top \lor \top \neq \top \lor C}(EF),

followed by equality resolution

p=Cp=C(ER),\frac{p = \top \lor \top \neq \top \lor C}{p = \top \lor C}(ER),

which recover the factored clause via superposition rules alone.