Related
So I have this mathematical language, it goes like this:
E -> number
[+,E,E,E] //e.g. [+,1,2,3] is 1+2+3 %we can put 2 to infinite Es here.
[-,E,E,E] //e.g. [-,1,2,3] is 1-2-3 %we can put 2 to infinite Es here.
[*,E,E,E] //e.g. [*,1,2,3] is 1*2*3 %we can put 2 to infinite Es here.
[^,E,E] //e.g. [^,2,3] is 2^3
[sin,E] //e.g. [sin,0] is sin 0
[cos,E] //e.g. [cos,0] is cos 0
and I want to write the set of rules that finds the numeric value of a mathematical expression written by this language in prolog.
I first wrote a function called "check", it checks to see if the list is written in a right way according to the language we have :
check1([]).
check1([L|Ls]):- number(L),check1(Ls).
check([L|Ls]):-atom(L),check1(Ls).
now I need to write the function "evaluate" that takes a list that is an expression written by this language, and a variable that is the numeric value corresponding to this language.
example:
?-evaluate([*,1,[^,2,2],[*,2,[+,[sin,0],5]]]],N) -> N = 40
so I wrote this:
sum([],0).
sum([L|Ls],N):- not(is_list(L)),sum(Ls,No),N is No + L.
min([],0).
min([L|Ls],N):-not(is_list(L)), min(Ls,No),N is No - L.
pro([],0).
pro([X],[X]).
pro([L|Ls],N):-not(is_list(L)), pro(Ls,No), N is No * L.
pow([L|Ls],N):-not(is_list(L)), N is L ^ Ls.
sin_(L,N):-not(is_list(L)), N is sin(L).
cos_(L,N):-not(is_list(L)), N is cos(L).
d([],0).
d([L|Ls],N):- L == '+' ,sum(Ls,N);
L == '-',min(Ls,N);
L == '*',pro(Ls,N);
L == '^',pow(Ls,N);
L == 'sin',sin_(Ls,N);
L == 'cos',cos_(Ls,N).
evaluate([],0).
evaluate([L|Ls],N):-
is_list(L) , check(L) , d(L,N),L is N,evaluate(Ls,N);
is_list(L), not(check(L)) , evaluate(Ls,N);
not(is_list(L)),not(is_list(Ls)),check([L|Ls]),d([L|Ls],N),
L is N,evaluate(Ls,N);
is_list(Ls),evaluate(Ls,N).
and it's working for just a list and returning the right answer , but not for multiple lists inside the main list, how should my code be?
The specification you work with looks like a production rule that describes that E (presumably short for Expression) might be a number or one of the 6 specified operations. That is the empty list [] is not an expression. So the fact
evaluate([],0).
should not be in your code. Your predicate sum/2 almost works the way you wrote it, except for the empty list and a list with a single element, that are not valid inputs according to your specification. But the predicates min/2 and pro/2 are not correct. Consider the following examples:
?- sum([1,2,3],X).
X = 6 % <- correct
?- sum([1],X).
X = 1 % <- incorrect
?- sum([],X).
X = 0 % <- incorrect
?- min([1,2,3],X).
X = -6 % <- incorrect
?- pro([1,2,3],X).
X = 6 ? ; % <- correct
X = 0 % <- incorrect
Mathematically speaking, addition and multiplication are associative but subtraction is not. In programming languages all three of these operations are usually left associative (see e.g. Operator associativity) to yield the mathematically correct result. That is, the sequence of subtractions in the above query would be calculated:
1-2-3 = (1-2)-3 = -4
The way you define a sequence of these operations resembles the following calculation:
[A,B,C]: ((0 op C) op B) op A
That works out fine for addition:
[1,2,3]: ((0 + 3) + 2) + 1 = 6
But it doesn't for subtraction:
[1,2,3]: ((0 - 3) - 2) - 1 = -6
And it is responsible for the second, incorrect solution when multiplying:
[1,2,3]: ((0 * 3) * 2) * 1 = 0
There are also some other issues with your code (see e.g. #lurker's comments), however, I won't go into further detail on that. Instead, I suggest a predicate that adheres closely to the specifying production rule. Since the grammar is describing expressions and you want to know the corresponding values, let's call it expr_val/2. Now let's describe top-down what an expression can be: It can be a number:
expr_val(X,X) :-
number(X).
It can be an arbitrarily long sequence of additions or subtractions or multiplications respectively. For the reasons above all three sequences should be evaluated in a left associative way. So it's tempting to use one rule for all of them:
expr_val([Op|Es],V) :-
sequenceoperator(Op), % Op is one of the 3 operations
exprseq_op_val(Es,Op,V). % V is the result of a sequence of Ops
The power function is given as a list with three elements, the first being ^ and the others being expressions. So that rule is pretty straightforward:
expr_val([^,E1,E2],V) :-
expr_val(E1,V1),
expr_val(E2,V2),
V is V1^V2.
The expressions for sine and cosine are both lists with two elements, the first being sin or cos and the second being an expression. Note that the argument of sin and cos is the angle in radians. If the second argument of the list yields the angle in radians you can use sin/1 and cos/2 as you did in your code. However, if you get the angle in degrees, you need to convert it to radians first. I include the latter case as an example, use the one that fits your application.
expr_val([sin,E],V) :-
expr_val(E,V1),
V is sin(V1*pi/180). % radians = degrees*pi/180
expr_val([cos,E],V) :-
expr_val(E,V1),
V is cos(V1*pi/180). % radians = degrees*pi/180
For the second rule of expr_val/2 you need to define the three possible sequence operators:
sequenceoperator(+).
sequenceoperator(-).
sequenceoperator(*).
And subsequently the predicate exprseq_op_val/3. As the leading operator has already been removed from the list in expr_val/2, the list has to have at least two elements according to your specification. In order to evaluate the sequence in a left associative way the value of the head of the list is passed as an accumulator to another predicate exprseq_op_val_/4
exprseq_op_val([E1,E2|Es],Op,V) :-
expr_val(E1,V1),
exprseq_op_val_([E2|Es],Op,V,V1).
that is describing the actual evaluation. There are basically two cases: If the list is empty then, regardless of the operator, the accumulator holds the result. Otherwise the list has at least one element. In that case another predicate, op_val_args/4, delivers the result of the respective operation (Acc1) that is then recursively passed as an accumulator to exprseq_op_val_/4 alongside with the tail of the list (Es):
exprseq_op_val_([],_Op,V,V).
exprseq_op_val_([E1|Es],Op,V,Acc0) :-
expr_val(E1,V1),
op_val_args(Op,Acc1,Acc0,V1),
exprseq_op_val_(Es,Op,V,Acc1).
At last you have to define op_val_args/4, that is again pretty straightforward:
op_val_args(+,V,V1,V2) :-
V is V1+V2.
op_val_args(-,V,V1,V2) :-
V is V1-V2.
op_val_args(*,V,V1,V2) :-
V is V1*V2.
Now let's see how this works. First your example query:
?- expr_val([*,1,[^,2,2],[*,2,[+,[sin,0],5]]],V).
V = 40.0 ? ;
no
The simplest expression according to your specification is a number:
?- expr_val(-3.14,V).
V = -3.14 ? ;
no
The empty list is not an expression:
?- expr_val([],V).
no
The operators +, - and * need at least 2 arguments:
?- expr_val([-],V).
no
?- expr_val([+,1],V).
no
?- expr_val([*,1,2],V).
V = 2 ? ;
no
?- expr_val([-,1,2,3],V).
V = -4 ? ;
no
The power function has exactly two arguments:
?- expr_val([^,1,2,3],V).
no
?- expr_val([^,2,3],V).
V = 8 ? ;
no
?- expr_val([^,2],V).
no
?- expr_val([^],V).
no
And so on...
I'm having a bit of trouble with something. I've wrote a function that returns the number of occurrences of an element in a list. Here is the code:
occurencesHelp(X,[],N,N).
occurencesHelp(X,[X|T],N,Y) :-
N1 is N+1,
occurencesHelp(X,T,N1,Y).
occurencesHelp(X,[H|T],N,Y) :-
occurencesHelp(X,T,N,Y).
occurences(X,List,N) :-
occurencesHelp(X,List,0,N).
This works fine, the first answer I get is:
N = 5 ?
but then there are multiple answers such as:
N = 4 ? ;
N = 4 ? ;
N = 3 ? ;
N = 4 ? ;
N = 3 ? ;
and so on. I've tried tracing through to see if I can see why this is the case but can't figure it out. I think using a cut would help me, but we have been specifically told not to use cut, so that isn't an option. Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks.
When I load your code in SWI-Prolog, I get the following warnings:
Warning: /home/isabelle/occ.pl:1:
Singleton variables: [X]
Warning: /home/isabelle/occ.pl:7:
Singleton variables: [H]
These warnings are important. Singleton variables are very often a sign that you have made a serious logical error. In your case, let's look at line 7. It's in this clause:
occurencesHelp(X,[H|T],N,Y) :-
occurencesHelp(X,T,N,Y).
Prolog tells us that H is a singleton variable. This means that it only occurs once in this clause, and this means that we forgot to put H in a relation with the other variables.
The previous clause says (procedurally): "if the head of the list is X, increment the counter". Conversely, this clause should say: "if the head of the list is not X, keep the counter unchanged". But it does not say that about the head of the list: In fact, it doesn't say anything about H (hence the warning).
So what you need to add is a goal expressing the fact that X and H should be unequal. Two ways to express this are X \= H and dif(X, H). In your case, the choice depends on what you have already learned in your course.
(The singleton warning for line 1 is benign in this case; you can just replace X by _X to tell Prolog that you explicitly want to ignore that variable.)
Hello can anyone help me compute the sum of the first n numbers. For example n=4 => sum = 10.
So far I've wrote this
predicates
sum(integer,integer)
clauses
sum(0,0).
sum(N,R):-
N1=N-1,
sum(N1,R1),
R=R1+N.
This one works but I need another implementation. I don't have any ideas how I could make this differen . Please help
What #mbratch said.
What you're computing is a triangular number. If your homework is about triangular numbers and not about learning recursive thinking, you can simply compute it thus:
triangular_number(N,R) :- R is N * (N+1) / 2 .
If, as is more likely, you're learning recursive thought, try this:
sum(N,R) :- % to compute the triangular number n,
sum(N,1,0,R) % - invoke the worker predicate with its counter and accumulator properly seeded
.
sum(0,_,R,R). % when the count gets decremented to zero, we're done. Unify the accumulator with the result.
sum(C,X,T,R) :- % otherwise,
C > 0 , % - assuming the count is greater than zero
T1 is T+X , % - increment the accumulator
X1 is X+1 , % - increment the current number
C1 is C-1 , % - decrement the count
sum(C1,X1,T1,R) % - recurse down
. % Easy!
Edited to add:
Or, if you prefer a count down approach:
sum(N,R) :- sum(N,0,R).
sum(0,R,R). % when the count gets decremented to zero, we're done. Unify the accumulator with the result.
sum(N,T,R) :- % otherwise,
N > 0 , % - assuming the count is greater than zero
T1 is T+N , % - increment the accumulator
N1 is N-1 , % - decrement the count
sum(N1,T1,R) % - recurse down
. % Easy!
Both of these are tail-recursive, meaning that the prolog compiler can turn them into iteration (google "tail recursion optimization" for details).
If you want to eliminate the accumulator, you need to do something like this:
sum(0,0).
sum(N,R) :-
N > 0 ,
N1 is N-1 ,
sum(N1,R1) ,
R is R1+N
.
A little bit simpler, but each recursion consumes another stack frame: given a sufficiently large value for N, execution will fail with a stack overflow.
sum(N, Sum) :-
Sum is (N + 1) * N / 2 .
Since you already got plenty of advice about your code, let me throw in a snippet (a bit off-topic).
Counting, and more generally, aggregating, it's an area where Prolog doesn't shine when compared to other relational,declarative languages (read SQL). But some vendor specific library make it much more pleasant:
?- aggregate(sum(N),between(1,4,N),S).
S = 10.
This is the "heart" of your program:
sum(N,R):-
R=R+N,
N=N-1,
sum(N,R).
The =/2 predicate (note the /2 means it accepts 2 arguments) is the instantiation predicate, not an assignment, or logical equal. It attempts to unify its arguments to make them the same. So if N is anything but 0, then R=R+N will always fail because R can never be the same as R+N. Likewise for N=N-1: it will always fail because N and N-1 can never be the same.
In the case of =/2 (unification), expressions are not evaluated. They are just terms. So if Y = 1, then X = Y + 1 unifies X with 1+1 as a term (equivalently written +(1,1)).
Because of the above issues, sum will always fail.
Numerical assignment of an arithmetic expression is done in Prolog with the is/2 predicate. Like this:
X is Y + 1.
This operator unifies the value of X to be the same as the value of the evaluated expression Y+1. In this case, you also cannot have X is X+1 for the same reason given above: X cannot be made the same as X+1 and Prolog does not allow "re-instantiation" of a variable inside of a clause. So you would need something like, X1 is X + 1. Also note that for is/2 to work, everything in the expression on the right must be previously instantiated. If any variables in the expression on the right do not have a value, you will get an instantiation error or, in the case of Turbo Prolog, Free variable in expression....
So you need to use different variables for expression results, and organize the code so that, if using is/2, variables in the expression are instantiated.
EDIT
I understand from Sergey Dymchenko that Turbo Prolog, unlike GNU or SWI, evaluates expressions for =/2. So the = will work in the given problem. However, the error regarding instantiation (or "free variable") is still caused by the same issue I mentioned above.
sum(N, N, N).
sum(M, N, S):-
N>M,
X is M+1,
sum(X, N, T),
S is M+T.
?- sum(1,5,N).
N = 15 .
Closed. This question needs details or clarity. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Add details and clarify the problem by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
I am trying to create a Palindrome Programme on Visual Prolog that checks user input number.
I somehow wrote some codes BUT it shows error and it is difficult for me to remove errors.
Please,
I need help on this code.
DOMAINS
Num,Temp,Reverse=integer
PREDICATES
palindrome
CLAUSES
*
palindrome:-
Reverse=:=0,
write("Enter a number to check ."),
readint(Number),
Temp=Number
loop(Temp=/=0) :-
Reverse=Reverse*10,
Reverse=Reverse+ Temp mod 10,
Temp=Temp/10,
false.
(Number=:=Reverse->
write("The Number ",Number," is a Palindrome "),
fail ; Number=/=Reverse->
write("The Number ",Number," is not a Palindrome.") ; .
GOAL
palindrome.
In writing a prolog program, it can be helpful to write down a clear, specific problem statement and decompose the problem. Something like:
A number is palindromic, IF it is an integer,
and IF its digits are identical when reversed, ignoring its sign.
That leads us to this interface predicate which pretty much recapitulates the problem statement, thus:
%---------------------
% the public interface
%---------------------
palindromic_number(X) :- % A number is palindromic if
integer(X) , % - it is an integer, and
X >= 0 , % - it is greater than or equal to zero, and
reverse_digits(X,0,X) % - its decimal value is the same if you reverse its decimal digits
. % ... OR ...
palindromic_number(X) :- % it is palindromic, if
integer(X) , % - it is an integer, and
X < 0 , % - it is less than zero, and
X1 is - X , % - its absolute value
palindromic_number(X) % - is palindromic
. % Easy!
Now, all we have to do is figure out how to reverse the digits of a number. Given that we've eliminated dealing with the sign, above, it's easy: Strip digits from the right end, adding them to the left end of the result, until we hit zero.
A useful idiom in prolog is to have a public predicate that fronts a private workder predicate that often takes an accumulator wherein the final result is built up as you recursively work the problem. Also, in this case (and many others), there is usually a general case and one or a few special cases. Here, our special case, which terminates the compuation is when the source value is zero.
Which leads us to this definition of "how to reverse the digits of a number":
% ---------------------
% The worker predicate
% ---------------------
reverse_digits(0,T,T). % once we hit zero, the accumulator has the reversed number. Unify the accumulator with the desired result.
reverse_digits(X,T,Y) :- % Otherwise...
X > 0 , % - if X > 0,
X1 is X / 10 , % - compute the next X
D is X mod 10 , % - compute the nexst digit
T1 is 10*T + D , % - scale the accumulator and add the digit
reverse_digits(X1,T1,Y) % - recurse down.
. % - easy!
Another approach, of course, would be to convert the number into a string (which is a list of individual characters), reverse that list using the built-in reverse/2 predicate and unify that with the original value. I doubt that is what your instructor is looking for, however.
I want to implement a predicate (vecLine2BitLine) which does the following:
get two lists and a number the first list is the length of blocks (the elements of the blocks are '$') and the second list contains the indexes that these blocks should be placed at meaning:
vecLine2BitLine([1,2,1],[2,5,9],12,BitLine).
BitLine=[' ','$',' ',' ','$','$',' ',' ','$',' ',' ',' '].
explanation:a block of length 1 is at index 2
and a block of length 2 is at index 5 and so on..
insert_at_mul : inserts an element N times (it works perfectly,dupli and my_flatten were implemented previously so i used them)
Ive been trying to activate insert_at_mul N times when N is the length of the list X and Y
in the predicate vecLine2BitLine.
dupli(L1,N,L2) :- dupli(L1,N,L2,N).
dupli([],_,[],_).
dupli([_|Xs],N,Ys,0) :- dupli(Xs,N,Ys,N).
dupli([X|Xs],N,[X|Ys],K) :- K > 0, K1 is K - 1, dupli([X|Xs],N,Ys,K1).
my_flatten(X,[X]) :- \+ is_list(X).
my_flatten([],[]).
my_flatten([X|Xs],Zs) :- my_flatten(X,Y), my_flatten(Xs,Ys), append(Y,Ys,Zs).
insert_at_mul(L,X,K,R,N):-dupli([X],N,XX) , insert_at(L,XX,K,L1) , my_flatten(L1,R).
get_num_spaces(L,N,X):-sum(L,S), X is N-S.
generate_spaces(N,L,X):- insert_at_mul(L,'',1,X,N).
vecLine2BitLineAux([],[],_,_,_).
vecLine2BitLineAux([X|Tail1],[Y|Tail2],N,L,Lnew):- insert_at_mul(L,'*',Y,Lnew,X) ,vecLine2BitLineAux(Tail1,Tail2,N,Lnew,R). // problem here!!!
vecLine2BitLine(X,Y,N,L):- get_num_spaces(X,N,Z) , generate_spaces(Z,[],ZZ) , vecLine2BitLineAux(X,Y,N,ZZ,L).
now the problem is that in the function vecLine2BitLine i cant activate insert_at_mul N times(thats what i tried to do in this code, but failed).
how can I fix vecLine2BitLine for it to work properly as in returning the correct output by actually activating the predicate insert_at_mul N times??
THANKS!
added :
vecLine2BitLine : input parameters : (L1,L2,N,Result)
N: after activating the predicate Result will be N in length.
L1: L1 is a list of numbers each number indicates the length of a block, a block is comprised of a Sequence of '$'.
L2: L2 is a list of numbers the numbers are indices for where the blocks in L1 should be placed.
example:
vecLine2BitLine([3,2],[1,5],9,BitLine).
we can look at the input better as tuples :
vecLine2BitLine[(3,1),(2,5)],9,BitLine).
(3,1) : there is a sequence of '' 3 times at index 1
(2,5) : there is a sequence of '' 2 times at index 5
in our example 9 is the length of BitLine at the end and we have to insert into the
list BitLine 3+2 of the "special chars" '*' but we have 9-(3+2) places left in the list
so we add '' in those places and then we get:
BitLine=['$','$','$','','$','$','','','',''].
This is kind of a nice problem because you can use the arguments as loop counters. The K argument gets you to the proper index. Let's just traverse the list and find a particular index as an example. Notice the base case is that you're at the right element, and the inductive case is prior to the right element.
traverse(1, [X|_], X).
traverse(N, [_|Xs], X) :- N > 0, N0 is N-1, traverse(N0, Xs, X).
We're going to apply that pattern to insert_at/4 to get to the right location in the list. Now let's write a repeat/3 predicate that repeats X N times in a new list L. This time the base case is when we've added all the repetitions we care to, and the inductive case is that we'll add another instance.
repeat(1, X, [X]).
repeat(N, X, [X|Xs]) :- N > 0, N0 is N-1, repeat(N0, X, Xs).
You can see the similarity of structure between these two. Try to combine them into a single predicate. Since this is homework, I'll stop here. You're inches from the goal.