1. Check whether the following argument is valid : If Paul lives in Dublin, he lives in Ireland. Paul lives in Ireland.

Therefore Paul lives in Dublin. (i) Represent the argument formally; (ii) Use truth tables to prove or disprove the validity of the argument. (iii) Build a counterexample if the argumentation is not valid.

Answer :

(i) Let D stand for Paul lives in Dublin I stand for Paul lives in Ireland We symbolize as follows: D I for, If Paul lives in Dublin than he lives in Ireland. Expressing the argument formally we have : {D I, I} |= D

(ii)

2. Three boxes are presented to you. One contains gold, the other two are empty. Each box has imprinted on it a clue as to its contents; the clues are (Box 1) The gold is not here, (Box 2) The gold is not

here, and (Box 3) the gold is in Box 2. Only one message is true; the other two are false. Which box has the gold? Formalize the puzzle in PL and find the solution using a truth table

ANSWER: - ,, The gold is in the first box. The message on the second and third boxes
are contradictory, which means one of those is telling the truth and one is false. since only one clue is true, then the right interpretation is the one of the second row, ie. the gold is in Box 1.

3. Compare Declarative and Procedural knowledge and describe the areas in which each can be applied. ANSWER: - There is a fundamental difference between declarative and
procedural knowledge. Declarative knowledge refers to factual knowledge and information that a person knows. Procedural knowledge, on the other hand, is knowing how to perform certain activities (Bruning, 46). According to John Anderson of Carnegie-Mellon University, all knowledge starts out as declarative information and procedural knowledge is acquired through inferences from already existing knowledge. (Payson) This is not to say that all procedural knowledge is "higher-order" knowledge. It is often done without any attention to what we are doing or why we are doing it, or automatized.

Q=4:- Determine whether each of the following sentence is Satisfiable, Contradictory or Valid a. P V Q & ~P V ~ Q & P & Q Ans:P 0 1 Q 0 0 ~P 1 0 ~Q 1 1 PvQ 0 0 ~Pv~Q 1 0

0 1

1 1

1 0

0 0

0 1

0 0

b. P ~Q ~P Ans:P 0 1 0 1 Q 0 0 1 1 ~P 1 0 1 0 ~Q 1 1 0 0 P=>~Q 1 1 1 1 P=>~Q=>~P 1 1 1 1

c. (P & Q) ~(P V Q) Ans:P 0 1 0 1 Q 0 0 1 1 ~P 1 0 1 0 Q=>~P 1 1 1 1 Q=>~PvQ 0 0 1 1

Q=5:- Given the following PL expressions, place parenthesis in the appropriate places to form fully abbreviated wffs. a. ~P V Q & R S U & Q b. P &~Q V P U ~ R c. Q V P V ~R & S ~U & P R
Ans:- a part is the correct answer of this question. That can be describe in the following tables. Table 1:P 0 1 Q 0 0 ~P 1 0 ~PvQ 0 0

0 1

1 1

1 0

1 0

Table 2:R 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 S 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 U 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 R->S 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 R->S->U 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 1

Q=6:- Consider the following sentences: Mary likes all kinds of food. Pizza is a kind of food. Apple is a food. Anything anyone eats is a food. John eats chicken. Ana eats everything Mary eats. Translate these sentences into Predicate Logic. Convert the formulae into clauses. Use resolution algorithm to answer the following question: What food does Ana eat? Prove that Mary likes chicken Ans:- 1) V(x)food(x)=>mary(x) 2) V(y,x)food(x)=>pizza(x). 3) food(apple). 4) V(x) food (x) AND(operator)any_one(x) 5) chicken(John). 6) Ana(x) AND (operator) Mary(x)=>eats(y).