Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question appears to be off-topic because it lacks sufficient information to diagnose the problem. Describe your problem in more detail or include a minimal example in the question itself.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
I have to write a rule square(S) in Prolog that tests if a number S is the square of an integer returning false (ex. square(3)) or true (ex. square(4)).
I used already a rule that generates all integers between 0 and M:
isInteger(X,M) :- between(0,M,X).
Using this generator I have to write the rule square(S). How can I do it?
Thanks
This probably will not work as a solution for your homework, but here is one of many ways to do it using constraint logic programming in ECLiPSe CLP Prolog:
:- lib(gfd).
square(S) :-
sqr(_) #= S.
It means: S is a square if it's an integer and some other value (we don't care what value, so we use "throw-out" variable _) squared equals S.
All modern Prolog systems supports constraint logic programming, and the code will be similar to above.
To solve it your way, you just need to check if S is the product of your generated integer multiplied by itself. So you could do it like this:
isInteger(X,M) :- between(0,M,X).
square(N) :-
isInteger(X, N),
N is X * X.
I came up with another possible solution, using the sqrt arithmetical function from SWI-Prolog but I think there must be a more elegant one.
I initially expected it would be as simple as X is sqrt(4), integer(X). However, this doesn't work (at least not in SWI-Prolog 7.1.4), because X is unified with the float 2.0 and integer(2.0) is false (since integer is checking the data type, not the value of the number). But this works:
square_of_integer(N) :-
Int is rationalize(sqrt(N)),
integer(Int).
It depends on first giving a representation of N as a rational (which, in SWI-Prolog, 'are represented by the compound term rdiv(N,M)'). 2 is rationalize(2.0), i.e., rationalize evaluates to an integer for round numbers.
Related
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 2 years ago.
Improve this question
Can Someone help me with the code for "finding if a no is armstrong no or not using prolog programming"?
I can't seem to find a solution anywhere.
Narcissistic numbers have different aliases such as Armstrong number, pluperfect digital invariant (PPDI) or plus perfect number.
numberToDigitsR(N,_,[]):-
N < 0, !.
numberToDigitsR(N,B,[N]):-
N < B, !.
numberToDigitsR(N,B,[Mod|R]):-
Mod is N mod B,
Div is N div B,
numberToDigitsR(Div,B,R).
powerList([],_,0).
powerList([H|T],E,Sum):-
powerList(T,E,TT),
Sum is (H**E)+TT.
narcissist(N,B):-
B>1,
numberToDigitsR(N,B,D),
length(D,E),
powerList(D,E,N).
tests:
?- narcissist(54748,10).
true.
?- narcissist(54748,9).
false.
?- narcissist(62,4).
true.
?- member(B,[2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16]), narcissist(54748,B).
B = 10 ;
false.
Thanks David for linking the wiki site.
The program first creates a list of the "digits" for a given number N and a given base B. Then it calculates the number of digits E and calculates the sum of each digit to the power of E. If the output equals the number N then this is a narcissistic number. If the base B is not known before, simply state the domain as shown in the last example.
Please note that this algorithm does not work for B=1.
Also note that the number N is given with decimal format. So if you look up numbers from this website, please convert the numbers to base 10 first.
I am currently using tkEclipse for my prolog and am currently stuck at this question.
Given base cases of an item with their name and number, I need to be able to find the smallest number without using rules such as if statements.
eg. anime(gundam, 1978), anime(steins_gate, 2011), anime(prison_school, 2015). and the answer would say gundam is the smallest number. This must not be hard coded because if you were to change the knowledge base then it should also change answer. Also, it should work if there are only two animes in the knowledge base.
I was thinking of something like this to start:
anime(X, Y), anime(A,B), Y < B, but things after that get tricky because not allowed to use :-
findall(N, anime(A, N), S),
setof(X, member(X,S), [Min|_]).
Or, in one line:
setof(N, A^anime(A, N), [Min|_]).
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
Prolog how to add numbers in a list in a loop?
I have the loop and I would need to add the numbers into a list and render it in the end.
Prolog is a logical language and not a imperative one. You may need to formulate the problem a bit differently. By formulating what you want and not how you want it.
This is a recursive version:
the list of numbers between A and B is empty if A >= B or else
the list of numbers between A ans B is A and the list of numbers between A+1 and B
This is a version with some of prologs features.
find all numbers X between A and B
These two versions can be transferred into prolog quite directly. There is no 'loop' because prolog is not about commands (do this! do that! put that value there! increase!) but about formulating the problem.
I don't know what you mean by rendering, but you can create a list of number easily via recursion, since prolog doesn't have loops:
range_list(M,M,[M]).
range_list(M,N,[M|R]) :-
M < N ,
M1 is M+1 ,
range_list(M1,N,R)
.
range_list(M,N,[M|R]) :-
M > N ,
M1 is M-1 ,
range_list(M1,N,R)
.
You could also use built-in predicates to get what you want:
range_list(From,To,Result) :-
findall(X,between(From,To,X),Result)
.
Given a set of constraints, I would like to efficiently generate the set of values.
Suppose I have a few constraints on my Thungus[1]:
goodThungus(X) :-
X > 100,
X < 1000.
sin(X) = 0.
Now, I can check a Thungus by asking:
goodThungus(500).
I would like to generate all good Thungi. I'm not sure how to do that; I'm really not sure about how to do it efficiently.
Note: this of course has to be a computable generation.
[1] Arbitrary object selected for this example.
What you are asking for can't be done in the full general case: imagine doing f(X) = 0 where f is a function for which the roots cannot be analytically determined, for example. Or suppose f(X) is the function "does the program X halt?". No computer is going to solve that for you.
Your options are basically to either:
Limit the set of constraints to things that you can reason about. e.g. inequalities are good because you can identify ranges, then do intersections and unions on ranges efficiently etc.
Limit the set of values to a small enough number that you can test them individually against each of the constraints
UPDATE: For the kind of constraints stated in the question (ranges of real values and real-valued functions that can be analytically solved and have a finite number of solutions within any range) I would suggest the following approach:
Write a generating function that can iteratively return solutions for you function within a given range... this will need to be done analytically e.g. exploiting the fact that sin(X)=0 implies X=n*pi where n is any integer.
Do interval arithmetic and bounding on your range constraints to work out the range(s) that need to be scanned (in the example you would want the range 100 < X < 1000)
Apply your generating function to each of the target ranges in order to create all of the possible solutions.
I'll preface my suggestion by stating that I'm no expert in using numerical constraint logic programming systems, but here goes...
On the surface, I'd think that solving this kind of problem in PROLOG would be best suited to a numerical constraint logic programming system, perhaps such as CLP(R) (for reals) in SWI-PROLOG; unfortunately, the specific problem you've asked for is seeking to solve for a set of constraints including a non-linear constraint, which seems to be not well or widely supported amongst PROLOG implementations; instead, they seem to deal mainly with linear constraints and often have limited support for non-linear constraints such as X = sin(Y), for example.
Take SWI-PROLOG's CLP(R) library, and the following example program:
:- use_module(library(clpr)).
report_xsq_zeros :-
findall(X, {0 = (X * X) - 10}, Results),
write_ln(Results).
report_sin_zeros :-
findall(X, {0 = sin(X)}, Results),
write_ln(Results).
Now, executing report_xsq_zeros gives us:
?- report_xsq_zeros.
[3.16228, -3.16228]
true.
Here, the system correctly computed the zeros of the quadratic x^2 - 10, which are indeed approximately 3.16228 and -3.16228, where the range of X was unbounded. However, when we execute report_sin_zeros, we get:
?- report_sin_zeros.
[0.0]
true.
We see that the system only computed a single zero of the function sin(X), even though the range of X was indeed also unbounded. Perhaps this is because it is recognized that there are an infinite number of solutions here (though I'm only guessing...). If we were to program what you've asked for:
report_sin_zeros :-
findall(X, {X > 100, X < 1000, 0 = sin(X)}, Results),
write_ln(Results).
We get no results, as the underlying system only computed a single zero for sin(X) as shown earlier (i.e., binding X to 0.0 which lies outside the stated range):
?- report_sin_zeros.
[]
true.
I conclude that I've either not demonstrated proper usage of SWI-PL CLP(R) (I suggest you look into it yourself), or it won't solve your specific (non-linear) problem. Other CLP(R) implementations may behave differently to SWI-PROLOG CLP(R), but I don't have them installed so I can't check, but you could try SICSTUS CLP(R) or others; the syntax looks similar.
He is searching any X in [100..1000] for that sin(x) = 0. But this is a pure mathematical problem, and not meant for relational logical deduction / backtracking. simple Prolog is not suited for this?
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about programming within the scope defined in the help center.
Closed 4 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm reading about an algorithm (it's a path-finding algorithm based on A*), and it contains a mathematical symbol I'm unfamiliar with: ∀
Here is the context:
v(s) ≥ g(s) = mins'∈pred(s)(v(s') + c(s', s)) ∀s ≠ sstart
Can someone explain the meaning of ∀?
That's the "forall" (for all) symbol, as seen in Wikipedia's table of mathematical symbols or the Unicode forall character (\u2200, ∀).
The upside-down A symbol is the universal quantifier from predicate logic. (Also see the more complete discussion of the first-order predicate calculus.) As others noted, it means that the stated assertions holds "for all instances" of the given variable (here, s). You'll soon run into its sibling, the backwards capital E, which is the existential quantifier, meaning "there exists at least one" of the given variable conforming to the related assertion.
If you're interested in logic, you might enjoy the book Logic and Databases: The Roots of Relational Theory by C.J. Date. There are several chapters covering these quantifiers and their logical implications. You don't have to be working with databases to benefit from this book's coverage of logic.
In math, ∀ means FOR ALL.
Unicode character (\u2200, ∀).
Can be read, "For all s such that s does not equal s[start]"
yes, these are the well-known quantifiers used in math. Another example is ∃ which reads as "exists".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantification