Related
Completely new to prolog. Interesting journey so far in trying to change how I think, so appreciate any help here.
I am trying to assert facts for a pre-defined set of names. For example, assume I have a a set of people [alice, bob, ...] in one file. I would like to assert facts about these folks in other files, but want to make sure that these folks exist and that is checked when the facts are loaded/compiled(?).
For example, assume I don't have 'chuck' in the list and I make an assertion:
user: swipl app.pl
?- full_name(chuck, "Charlie Steel").
should result in an error.
What is the best way I can do this?
So, here's the code I came up with:
person(deborah).
person(tony).
read_my_file(Filename) :-
open(Filename, read, In),
read_my_file1(In),
close(In).
read_my_file1(In) :-
read(In, Term),
( Term == end_of_file
-> true
; assert_or_abort(Term),
read_my_file1(In)
).
assert_or_abort(Term) :-
( full_name(Person, Name) = Term
-> ( person(Person)
-> assertz(full_name(Person, Name))
; format(user, '~w is not a person I recognize~n', [Person])
)
; format(user, '~w is not a term I know how to parse~n', [Term])
).
The trick here is using read/2 to obtain a Prolog term from the stream, and then doing some deterministic tests of it, hence the nested conditional structure inside assert_or_abort/1. Supposing you have an input file that looks like this:
full_name(deborah, 'Deborah Ismyname').
full_name(chuck, 'Charlie Steel').
full_name(this, has, too, many, arguments).
squant.
You get this output:
?- read_my_file('foo.txt').
chuck is not a person I recognize
full_name(this,has,too,many,arguments) is not a term I know how to parse
squant is not a term I know how to parse
true.
?- full_name(X,Y).
X = deborah,
Y = 'Deborah Ismyname'.
I have been working with Prolog since today, and wanted to create a simple test case. The basic idea was to have multiple sports defined, and it looks as follows:
soccer :- category(ball_sport),
check(has_11_players_per_team),
check(large_ball),
check(use_feet).
tennis :- category(ball_sport),
...
category(ball_sport) :-
check(has_a_ball).
Now I wanted to create a testcase, to see if both sports are of the ball_sport category, but have no idea to check these sports against eachother .. I thought it would be something like the code below, but it's obvious not. Is there an easy way to check these predicate categories? Thanks
both_ballsports(sport_one, sport_two) :-
has_category(sport_one, ball_sport),
has_category_sport_two, ball_sport).
It seems that first of all, you want to declaratively state attributes of a sport.
For example:
sport_attributes(soccer, [ball_sport,players(22),ball(large),use(feet)]).
sport_attributes(tennis, [ball_sport,players(2),players(4),ball(small),use(racket)]).
Note that I am relating sports to attributes. For comparison, the goals of the form check(X) you use above all seem to lack a critical argument, namely the actual sport for which they hold (or not). For example, the goal check(use_feet) either holds or not, but there is no means to qualify a unary predicate of this kind and state different facts for different sports.
Note the naming convention: We describe what each argument means, separated by underscores.
With this representation, both_ballsports/2 could look like this:
both_ballsports(Sport1, Sport2) :-
ballsport(Sport1),
ballsport(Sport2).
ballsport(Sport) :-
sport_attributes(Sport, As),
member(ball(_), As).
Sample query and answer:
?- both_ballsports(Sport1, Sport2).
Sport1 = Sport2, Sport2 = soccer ;
Sport1 = soccer,
Sport2 = tennis ;
Sport1 = tennis,
Sport2 = soccer ;
Sport1 = Sport2, Sport2 = tennis ;
false.
This can be used in all directions!
I'm super new to Prolog, like, my professor assigned us a program and just asked us to watch a couple youtube videos. No lecture.
So anyway, here's the issue:
I'm supposed to create a pharmacist software that looks up drug interactions.
When I enter a specific drug, then Drug-variable, and Interaction-variable, I get the first drug and interaction in the list (of like, 100 drugs that interact with temazepam):
?- interacts(temazepam,Drug,Interaction).
Drug = thalidomide,
Interaction = neutropenia .
Part 1) How can I get every drug and its interaction from, say, temazepam?
Partial program listed below [because I have 1609 lines of drug interactions listed]:
interacts(X,Y,Interaction):-
Drug(X),
Drug(Y),
Interaction.
Interaction:-
Drug(X),
Drug(Y).
interacts(gatifloxacin,zolpidem,attempted_suicide).
interacts(gatifloxacin,zolpidem,insomnia).
interacts(gatifloxacin,warfarin,cardiac_decompensation).
interacts(gatifloxacin,isosorbide-5-mononitrate,arteriosclerotic_heart_disease).
interacts(gatifloxacin,rosiglitazone,hyperglycaemia).
interacts(gatifloxacin,bortezomib,hyperglycaemia).
interacts(gatifloxacin,mometasone,asthma).
interacts(gatifloxacin,cisplatin,hyperglycaemia).
interacts(gatifloxacin,cisplatin,bone_marrow_failure).
interacts(gatifloxacin,montelukast,difficulty_breathing).
interacts(temazepam,thalidomide,neutropenia).
interacts(temazepam,thalidomide,thrombocytopenia).
interacts(temazepam,timolol,drowsiness).
interacts(temazepam,tizanidine,acid_reflux).
interacts(temazepam,tizanidine,heart_attack).
interacts(temazepam,tolterodine,amnesia).
Part 2) I need to be able to list an interaction and get back every drug that caused it.
I guess just the side-effect then all drug interactions listed would be better than listing drug1+sideEffect = drug2.
Example:
?- interacts(Drug,Drug,amnesia).
Part 3) I should be able to enter a single drug, and get everything with interactions and everything with no interactions.
Example:
?- interacts(valacyclovir,Drug,Interaction).
Drug = zolpidem,
Interaction = anxiety
But for everything
Excuse me for the edits!
Thanks so much in advance!
You can use the built-in predicate findall/3 for that:
drug_allinteractions(Drug,AI) :-
findall((D,I),interacts(Drug,D,I),AI).
The only goal of drug_allinteractions/2 is using findall/3 to query interacts/3 and put its second and third argument into the list AI as a tuple (D,I). Example query: Wich interacting drugs with what interaction-effect are known for gatifloxacin?:
?- drug_allinteractions(gatifloxacin,L).
L = [(zolpidem,attempted_suicide),(zolpidem,insomnia),(warfarin,cardiac_decompensation),(isosorbide-5-mononitrate,arteriosclerotic_heart_disease),(rosiglitazone,hyperglycaemia),(bortezomib,hyperglycaemia),(mometasone,asthma),(cisplatin,hyperglycaemia),(cisplatin,bone_marrow_failure),(montelukast,difficulty_breathing)]
Alternatively, if you just want to query interacts/3 and not write a program:
?- findall((D,I),interacts(gatifloxacin,D,I),AI).
AI = [(zolpidem,attempted_suicide),(zolpidem,insomnia),(warfarin,cardiac_decompensation),(isosorbide-5-mononitrate,arteriosclerotic_heart_disease),(rosiglitazone,hyperglycaemia),(bortezomib,hyperglycaemia),(mometasone,asthma),(cisplatin,hyperglycaemia),(cisplatin,bone_marrow_failure),(montelukast,difficulty_breathing)]
As for your added part 2): You can use findall on your original query:
?- findall((D1,D2),interacts(D1,D2,amnesia),AI).
AI = [(temazepam,tolterodine)]
Note, that unlike in your example I wrote two different variables D1 and D2 for the drugs, otherwise you are asking which drug has the interaction-effect amnesia with itself.
Considering your added part 3) I'm not entirely sure what you want. Your query reads: "Show me all drugs that interact with valacyclovir plus the associated effect". That is basically the same as your very first query, just for a different drug. You can query for all drugs in the relation interacts/3 interactively without showing the interacting drugs and the effects by:
?- interacts(D,_,_).
D = gatifloxacin ? ;
...
Or query for an entire list without duplicates by using setof/3:
?- setof(D1,D2^I^interacts(D1,D2,I),AI).
AI = [gatifloxacin,temazepam]
If you, however, try to find a list of drugs that are not interacting with a given drug, you can write a predicate, say drug_noninteractingdrug/2...
:- use_module(library(lists)).
drug_noninteractingdrug(D,NID) :-
dif(D,NID), % D and NID are different
setof(D2,D^interacts(D,D2,_),L), % L ... all drugs interacting with D
interacts(NID,_,_), % NID ... drug...
\+member(NID,L). % ... that is not in L
... and query this using setof/3:
?- setof(NID,drug_noninteractingdrug(gatifloxacin,NID),NIDs).
NIDs = [temazepam]
With your given minimal example this query of course only yields one drug. Note that you need to include library(lists) for the predicate member/2.
Given this program, why am I forced to define every atom in the predicate, even if they're anonymous. Why is it that undefined variables in a dict predicate aren't thought of as anonymous?
funt2(X) :-
X = point{x:5, y:6}.
evalfunt(point{x:5, y : 6}) :-
write('hello world!').
evalfunt(point{x:_, y : _} ) :-
write('GoodBye world!').
Why can't I just say
evalfunt(point{x:5}) :-
write('GoodBye world!').
^that won't match, by the way.
I may as well just use a structure if I have to define every possible value in the dict to use dicts.
What's the motivation here? Can I do something to make my predicate terse? I'm trying to define a dict with 30 variables and this is a huge roadblock. It's going to increase my program size by a magnitude if I'm forced to define each variables (anonymous or not).
Dict is just a complex data type, like tuple, which has data AND structure. If you have, for example two facts:
fact(point{x:5, y:6}).
fact(point{x:5}).
Then the query
fact(point{x:_}).
will match the second one, but not the first one.
And the query
fact(point{x:_, y:_}).
Will match the first one, but not the second.
Now, if you want to match facts of the form fact(point{x:_, y:_, z:_}) only by one specific field, you can always write a helper rule:
matchByX(X, P) :- fact(P), P=point{x:X, y:_, z:_}.
So having facts:
fact(point{x:5, y:6, z:1}).
fact(point{x:1, y:2, z:3}).
fact(point{x:2, y:65, z:4}).
and quering
matchByX(1, P).
will return:
P = point{x:1, y:2, z:3}
UPDATE:
Moreover, in SWI-Prolog 7 version the field names can be matched as well, so it can be written in much more generic way, even for facts with different structures:
fact(point{x:5, y:6, z:1}).
fact(point{x:1, y:2}).
fact(point{x:2}).
fact(point{x:2, y:2}).
matchByField(F, X, P) :- fact(P), P.F = X.
So query:
?- matchByField(x, 2, P).
P = point{x:2} ;
P = point{x:2, y:2}.
I was able to accomplish what I needed by doing the following
checkiffive(Y) :-
get_dict(x, Y, V), V=5.
You need to use the built in methods for unifying values from a dict.
Described in chapter 5.4 of the SWI prolog reference
http://www.swi-prolog.org/download/devel/doc/SWI-Prolog-7.1.16.pdf
I would need help about Prolog.
I posted my code, the problem is that i do not obtain the expected result.
I want planning actions for moving on table all blocks until is possible. To do this I prompt :
?- do(while(some(x, block(x) & -onTable(x)),pi(x,putOnTable(x))),s0,S).
I expect to see a response like :
S = do(putOnTable(e), do(putOnTable(b), do(putOnTable(c), s0)))
but Prolog returns "false" only. Someone can help me??
% Golog interpreter
%:- [golog_swi].
:- discontiguous clear/2, on/3, onTable/2.
:- op(800,xfy,[&]).
do(E,S,do(E,S)):- primitive_action(E),poss(a,S).
% Primitive Action Declarations.
primitive_action(putOn(_,_)).
primitive_action(putOnTable(_)).
poss(putOn(X,Y),S) :- clear(X,S), clear(Y,S), \+ on(X,Y,S), \+ X=Y.
poss(putOnTable(X),S):- clear(X,S), \+(onTable(X,S)).
% Successor State Axioms.
on(X,Y,do(A,S)):- A = putOn(X,Y); on(X,Y,S), \+ (A = putOnTable(X); A = putOn(X,_)).
onTable(X,do(A,S)) :- A = putOnTable(X); onTable(X,S), \+ A= putOn(X,_).
clear(X,do(A,S)) :- on(Y,X,S), (A = putOn(Y,_) ; A = putOnTable(Y)); clear(X,S), \+ A = putOn(_,X).
% Restore suppressed situation arguments
restoreSitArg(onTable(X),S,onTable(X,S)).
restoreSitArg(on(X,Y),S,on(X,Y,S)).
restoreSitArg(clear(X),S,clear(X,S)).
block(X):- member(X,[a,b,c,d,e]).
% iniTial COndition
onTable(a,s0).
on(b,a,s0).
on(c,b,s0).
clear(c,s0).
onTable(d,s0).
on(e,d,s0).
clear(3,s0).
thank you!!!
Your predicate do/3 cannot succeed because the goal primitive_action/1 will fail with your query.
Currently, while/2 is not described in primitive_action/1 and it seems it is missing also from your program. So you need to extend primitive_action/1 by further facts, or add a new rule to do/3. And in addition to that you need to describe what while/2 means.
This question is actually about Golog. Your mistake is pretty mundane: you didn't copy the Golog interpreter code into your source file/directory.
Golog defines a number of high-level programming constructs, including while-loops and non-deterministic picks (pi), used here. I'm sure you don't want to reinvent Golog, so just go and get it. I'm assuming that your question is part of an assignment of sorts, and your teacher probably pointed you to the Golog interpreter. Otherwise, you can always find it on the pages of the cognitive robotics group at the Univ. of Toronto: http://www.cs.toronto.edu/cogrobo/main/systems/index.html