The Department of Computer Science & Engineering
Last Update: 22 April 2005
Note: or material is highlighted
|Index:||Other Relevant Links:|
This course is the first semester of a 2-semester sequence (followed by CSE 663), but will be self-contained, concentrating on logic as a universal, basic, "core" KRR formalism.
You will be introduced to the issues and techniques of representing and reasoning about knowledge and belief in a computer system and to the syntax and semantics of various representational and reasoning formalisms including classical propositional and first-order predicate logic and semantic networks.
|MWF||1:00 - 1:50 p.m.||NSC 228|
|Recitation B1||Goldfain||463: 035498 |
|M||2:00 - 2:50 p.m.||Baldy 125|
|Recitation B2||Goldfain||463: 445529 |
|W||4:00 - 4:50 p.m.||Talbert 113|
Note: I have adjusted some of the dates below to reflect what we actually did in class, rather than on what I had hoped to do:-)
(from B&L, unless otherwise noted
|W||Jan.||19||Introduction to KRR||Preface; Ch. 1|
Recommended: Friedland et al. 2004
|M||31||SNePSLOG as an example of a real KRR system||Ch. 2 (initial reading)|
Toy ontology: Blocks world;
Syntax vs. Semantics
Classical Logic: Propositional Logic
syntax and semantics
plus one of:
syntax and semantics (continued)
|W||9||Ch. 3 (initial reading)|
proof theory (cont'd.)
& natural deduction
|see online readings, above|
natural deduction (cont'd.)
& semantic inference (truth tables)
|F||18||Classical Logic: First-Order Logic (FOL)||
Ch. 2 (re-read carefully);
Programming Project 1 assigned
|Re-read Ch.2: pp.15-18 carefully|
representation of English sentences
parts of Ch.3
"Representing English Sentences in FOL"
|W||Mar.||2||Review for Exam|
|F||4||*** MIDTERM EXAM ***|
|Re-read Ch.2, pp.18-24 carefully|
|M||9||Review of Exam|
FOL: model theory (cont'd.)
NOTE: proof theory covered in recitation!
Last R Day
Automated Theorem Proving:
|Re-read Ch.4 carefully|
Clause Form (concluded),
|M||4||Problems with FOL||Shapiro 2000|
The SNePS KRRA System:
SNePS: propositional representation
Shapiro & Rapaport 1987
Shapiro & Rapaport 1995
|M||11||SNePS: propositional representation (cont'd)||
Shapiro & Rapaport 1995
Shapiro & Rapaport 1987
|W||13||SNePS: SNeBR belief revision||
Martins & Shapiro 1988
Project 1 Due
Project 2 assigned!
SNePS: node-based, path-based inference
Shapiro & Rapaport 1987
|M||18||SNePS: intensional KR||
Shapiro & Rapaport 1987;
SNePS readings on intensionality
|W||20||SNePS: ontology (case frames)||
Shapiro et al. 1996
|F||22||SNePS: ontology (concluded)||
Shapiro & Kandefer 2005
Re-read Ch. 3;
Mark & Turk 2003
Project 2 due!;
Is KR necessary?
Summary & Review
Davis et al. 1993
11:45 a.m.-2:45 p.m.
|"Teachers open the door, but you must enter by yourself." -- Chinese Proverb|
"You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink." -- American Proverb
You will automatically be placed on an email list (a "Listserv") for the course. If you do not normally read email at the email address that UB has as your official address, please either do so for this course, or else have your mail forwarded. I will use this list as my main means of communicating with you out of class, and you can use it to communicate with the rest of us.
You may send questions and comments that are of general interest to the entire class using the Listserv: Just send them to:
You can also send email just to me, at:
In any case, be sure to fill in the subject line, beginning with "CSE 563: " so that my mailer doesn't think it's spam.
If you send email to me that I deem to be of general interest, I will feel free to remail it anonymously to the email list along with my reply unless you explicitly tell me otherwise.
I will archive the emails at http://www.cse.buffalo.edu/~rapaport/563S05/email.txt.
For more information, read the Listserv Information webpage.
If they are turned in after the start of lecture, your grade will be discounted by one full letter grade (e.g., A becomes B, A- becomes B-, etc.).
If they are turned in after the start of the next lecture, your grade will be discounted by two full letter grades (e.g., A becomes C, A- becomes C-, etc.).
If you turn in a HW after the start of the class after that, your grade will be discounted by three full letter grades (e.g., A becomes D, etc.).
No HWs will be accepted after that.
But you are strongly advised to (learn and) use Lisp if you intend to do any research in AI. Moreover, there are good reasons and easy ways to learn Lisp!
CSE 463 students will have accounts on the CSE undergraduate machines; CSE 563 students will have accounts on the Grad Lab machines. If you do not have access to these machines, please let me know as soon as possible! You will be expected to learn how to use Unix, emacs, etc., on your own. CIT offers short courses on Unix, etc. To contact CIT:
|in person:||216 Computing Center|
|on the Web:||http://wings.buffalo.edu/computing/Help-Desk/|
In the real world, you will be expected to write papers, either for presentation at conferences, publication in journals, or presentation to your boss or co-workers. No one reads computer programs except the programmer him- or herself, or someone else who has to modify the program. Users and other people want to read about the program, what it does, how it works, etc., and to see it in action. Consequently, the main product of your work is the paper, not the program! In the paper, you should say what you have done, and say (in English summary, not in programming detail) how you have done it. It should also include annotated examples of your program in action. These should be well chosen to illustrate the range of performance of your program. The examples should not be redundant, nor included merely because they look complicated. Each example should illustrate a particular ability of your program. Nevertheless, the reader will assume that your program does nothing interesting that isn't illustrated! To see an example of such a paper, you can read:
The program listing should either be presented as figures throughout the paper, or as an appendix. In either case, the listing is included as documentation for what you say in the paper.
Thus, each report must consist of the following components:
(including attendance, homeworks, quizzes, etc.)
For further information, see my web document on "How I Grade"
It is University policy that a grade of Incomplete
is to be given only when a small amount of work or a single exam is
missed due to circumstances beyond the student's control, and that
student is otherwise doing passing work.
And it is CSE departmental policy that Incompletes cannot be made up
merely by auditing another section of this course.
I will follow these policies
strictly! Thus, you should assume that I will not give
incompletes :-) (This is even more important since I expect to be
on sabbatical next semester and, thus, unavailable to handle
Any incompletes that I might have to give, in a lapse of judgment :-),
will have to be made up by the end of the
For more information on Incomplete policies, see the web page,
While it is acceptable to discuss general
approaches with your fellow students, the work you turn in must be your
own. It is the policy of this department that any violation of
academic integrity will
result in an F for the course, that all departmental
financial support including teaching
assistanceship, research assistanceship, or scholarships be
terminated, that notification of this
action be placed in the student's confidential
departmental record, and that the student be
permanently ineligible for future departmental financial
support. If you have any
problems doing the assignments, consult
Prof. Rapaport. Please be sure to read the webpage,
"Academic Integrity: Policies and Procedures", which spells out all the
details of this, and related, policies.
In large classes (such as this), students have been known to be disruptive,
either to the instructor or to fellow students. The university's
policies on this topic, both how the instructor should respond and how
students should behave, may be found in the document
or Disruption in the Classroom - Policies".