X-Git-Url: http://lambda.jimpryor.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=lambda.git;a=blobdiff_plain;f=hints%2Fassignment_7_hint_5.mdwn;h=40df3b81971f5b8c31139c6fcfd7bc942fbdce24;hp=1b2ee6a9ceb116bfa936a44652b166934f96b475;hb=ddcb99cc42fe32a7a16ba2fe78b9228c354807d0;hpb=be5eb752358a5067486efb6d515411551025f1e1 diff --git a/hints/assignment_7_hint_5.mdwn b/hints/assignment_7_hint_5.mdwn index 1b2ee6a9..40df3b81 100644 --- a/hints/assignment_7_hint_5.mdwn +++ b/hints/assignment_7_hint_5.mdwn @@ -1,31 +1,31 @@ +* How shall we handle \[[∃x]]? As we said, GS&V really tell us how to interpret \[[∃xPx]], but for our purposes, what they say about this can be broken naturally into two pieces, such that we represent the update of our starting set `u` with \[[∃xPx]] as: -* How shall we handle \[[∃x]]? As we said, GS&V really tell us how to interpret \[[∃xPx]], but what they say about this breaks naturally into two pieces, such that we can represent the update of our starting set `u` with \[[∃xPx]] as: - -
u >>=set \[[∃x]] >>=set \[[Px]]
+	
u >>= \[[∃x]] >>= \[[Px]]
 	
+ (Extra credit: how does the discussion on pp. 25-29 of GS&V bear on the possibility of this simplification?) + What does \[[∃x]] need to be here? Here's what they say, on the top of p. 13: > Suppose an information state `s` is updated with the sentence ∃xPx. Possibilities in `s` in which no entity has the property P will be eliminated. - We can defer that to a later step, where we do `... >>= \[[Px]]`. + We can defer that to a later step, where we do `... >>= \[[Px]]`. GS&V continue: - > The referent system of the remaining possibilities will be extended with a new peg, which is associated with `x`. And for each old possibility `i` in `s`, there will be just as many extensions `i[x/d]` in the new state `s'` and there are entities `d` which in the possible world of `i` have the property P. + > The referent system of the remaining possibilities will be extended with a new peg, which is associated with `x`. And for each old possibility `i` in `s`, there will be just as many extensions `i[x/d]` in the new state `s'` as there are entities `d` which in the possible world of `i` have the property P. Deferring the "property P" part, this corresponds to:
u updated with \[[∃x]] ≡
-		let extend_one = fun (one_dpm : bool dpm) ->
-			List.map (fun d -> bind_dpm one_dpm (new_peg_and_assign 'x' d)) domain
-		in bind_set u extend_one
+		let extend one_dpm (d : entity) =
+			bind_dpm one_dpm (new_peg_and_assign 'x' d)
+		in bind_set u (fun one_dpm -> List.map (fun d -> extend one_dpm d) domain)
 	
where `new_peg_and_assign` is the operation we defined in [hint 3](/hints/assignment_7_hint_3): - let new_peg_and_assign (var_to_bind : char) (d : entity) = - (* we want to return not a function that we can bind to a bool dpm *) - fun (truth_value : bool) : bool dpm -> - fun ((r, h) : assignment * store) -> + let new_peg_and_assign (var_to_bind : char) (d : entity) : bool -> bool dpm = + fun truth_value -> + fun (r, h) -> (* first we calculate an unused index *) let new_index = List.length h (* next we store d at h[new_index], which is at the very end of h *) @@ -35,13 +35,11 @@ in let r' = fun var -> if var = var_to_bind then new_index else r var (* we pass through the same truth_value that we started with *) - in (truth_value, r', h') + in (truth_value, r', h');; - What's going on in this representation of `u` updated with \[[∃x]]? For each `bool dpm` in `u`, we collect `dpm`s that are the result of passing through their `bool`, but extending their input `(r, h)` by allocating a new peg for entity `d`, for each `d` in our whole domain of entities, and binding the variable `x` to the index of that peg. - - A later step can then filter out all the `dpm`s according to which the entity `d` we did that with doesn't have property P. + What's going on in this proposed representation of \[[∃x]]? For each `bool dpm` in `u`, we collect `dpm`s that are the result of passing through their `bool`, but extending their input `(r, h)` by allocating a new peg for entity `d`, for each `d` in our whole domain of entities, and binding the variable `x` to the index of that peg. A later step can then filter out all the `dpm`s where the entity `d` we did that with doesn't have property P. (Again, consult GS&V pp. 25-9 for extra credit.) - So if we just call the function `extend_one` defined above \[[∃x]], then `u` updated with \[[∃x]] updated with \[[Px]] is just: + If we call the function `(fun one_dom -> List.map ...)` defined above \[[∃x]], then `u` updated with \[[∃x]] updated with \[[Px]] is just:
u >>= \[[∃x]] >>= \[[Px]]
 	
@@ -57,26 +55,34 @@ type assignment = char -> entity;; type 'a reader = assignment -> 'a;; - let unit_reader (x : 'a) = fun r -> x;; + let unit_reader (value : 'a) : 'a reader = fun r -> value;; - let bind_reader (u : 'a reader) (f : 'a -> 'b reader) = + let bind_reader (u : 'a reader) (f : 'a -> 'b reader) : 'b reader = fun r -> let a = u r in let u' = f a in u' r;; - let getx = fun r -> r 'x';; + Here the type of a sentential clause is: + + type clause = bool reader;; + + Here are meanings for singular terms and predicates: + + let getx : entity reader = fun r -> r 'x';; + + type lifted_unary = entity reader -> bool reader;; - let lift (predicate : entity -> bool) = + let lift (predicate : entity -> bool) : lifted_unary = fun entity_reader -> fun r -> let obj = entity_reader r in unit_reader (predicate obj) - `lift predicate` converts a function of type `entity -> bool` into one of type `entity reader -> bool reader`. The meaning of \[[Qx]] would then be: + The meaning of \[[Qx]] would then be:
\[[Q]] ≡ lift q
-	\[[x]] & equiv; getx
+	\[[x]] ≡ getx
 	\[[Qx]] ≡ \[[Q]] \[[x]] ≡
 		fun r ->
 			let obj = getx r
@@ -85,21 +91,23 @@
 
 	Recall also how we defined \[[lambda x]], or as [we called it before](/reader_monad_for_variable_binding), \\[[who(x)]]:
 
-		let shift (var_to_bind : char) entity_reader (v : 'a reader) =
-		fun (r : assignment) ->
-			let new_value = entity_reader r
-			(* remember here we're implementing assignments as functions rather than as lists of pairs *)
-			in let r' = fun var -> if var = var_to_bind then new_value else r var
-			in v r'
+		let shift (var_to_bind : char) (clause : clause) : lifted_unary =
+			fun entity_reader ->
+				fun r ->
+					let new_value = entity_reader r
+					(* remember here we're implementing assignments as functions rather than as lists of pairs *)
+					in let r' = fun var -> if var = var_to_bind then new_value else r var
+					in clause r'
 
 	Now, how would we implement quantifiers in this setting? I'll assume we have a function `exists` of type `(entity -> bool) -> bool`. That is, it accepts a predicate as argument and returns `true` if any element in the domain satisfies that predicate. We could implement the reader-monad version of that like this:
 
-		fun (lifted_predicate : entity reader -> bool reader) : bool reader ->
-			fun r -> exists (fun (obj : entity) -> lifted_predicate (unit_reader obj) r)
+		fun (lifted_predicate : lifted_unary) ->
+			fun r -> exists (fun (obj : entity) ->
+				lifted_predicate (unit_reader obj) r)
 			
 	That would be the meaning of \[[∃]], which we'd use like this:
 
-	
\[[∃]] \[[Q]]
+	
\[[∃]] ( \[[Q]] )
 	
or this: @@ -109,45 +117,74 @@ If we wanted to compose \[[∃]] with \[[lambda x]], we'd get: - let shift var_to_bind entity_reader v = - fun r -> + let shift var_to_bind clause = + fun entity_reader r -> let new_value = entity_reader r in let r' = fun var -> if var = var_to_bind then new_value else r var - in v r' + in clause r' in let lifted_exists = fun lifted_predicate -> fun r -> exists (fun obj -> lifted_predicate (unit_reader obj) r) - in fun bool_reader -> lifted_exists (shift 'x' getx bool_reader) + in fun bool_reader -> lifted_exists (shift 'x' bool_reader) which we can simplify to: - let shifted v = - fun r -> - let new_value = r 'x' + + + fun bool_reader -> + let shifted r new_value = + let r' = fun var -> if var = 'x' then new_value else r var + in bool_reader r' + in fun r -> exists (shifted r) + + This gives us a value for \[[∃x]], which we use like this: + +
\[[∃x]] ( \[[Qx]] )
+	
+ + Contrast the way we use \[[∃x]] in GS&V's system. Here we don't have a function that takes \[[Qx]] as an argument. Instead we have a operation that gets bound in a discourse chain: + +
u >>= \[[∃x]] >>= \[[Qx]]
+	
+ + The crucial difference in GS&V's system is that the distinctive effect of the \[[∃x]]---to allocate new pegs in the store and associate variable `x` with the objects stored there---doesn't last only while interpreting some clauses supplied as arguments to \[[∃x]]. Instead, it persists through the discourse, possibly affecting the interpretation of claims outside the logical scope of the quantifier. This is how we'll able to interpret claims like: + + > If ∃x (man x and ∃y y is wife of x) then (x kisses y). + + See the discussion on pp. 24-5 of GS&V. + +* Can you figure out how to handle \[[not φ]] and the other connectives? If not, here are some [more hints](/hints/assignment_7_hint_6). But try to get as far as you can on your own. -* Can you figure out how to handle \[[not φ]] on your own? If not, here are some [more hints](/hints/assignment_7_hint_6). But try to get as far as you can on your own.