UNIT 3

1. Explain first-order logic with suitable examples. How does it differ

from propositional logic?

First-Order Logic (FOL) and Its Differences from Propositional Logic

1. Introduction

Logic is fundamental in Artificial Intelligence (AI) for knowledge representation and

reasoning. Two primary types of logic used in AI are:

 Propositional Logic (PL) – Represents facts as simple statements.

 First-Order Logic (FOL) – Extends propositional logic by introducing quantifiers,
predicates, and variables, making it more expressive.

FOL is widely used in AI applications, such as automated reasoning, expert systems, and
natural language processing (NLP).

2. Understanding First-Order Logic (FOL)

A. Components of First-Order Logic

FOL consists of the following elements:

Component Description Example

Constants Represent specific objects John, Paris
Variables Represent general objects x, y, z
Represent properties or relations
Predicates Loves(John, Mary) (John loves Mary)
between objects
Father(John) = David (David is John’s
Functions Map objects to other objects
father)
Quantifiers Define the scope of variables ∀ (for all), ∃ (there exists)
B. Syntax of First-Order Logic

1. Atomic Sentences:
o Loves(John, Mary) → Meaning: "John loves Mary"
o GreaterThan(5, 3) → Meaning: "5 is greater than 3"
2. Complex Sentences (Using Logical Connectives):
o Conjunction (AND, ∧): Loves(John, Mary) ∧ Loves(Mary, John)
o Disjunction (OR, ∨): Loves(John, Mary) ∨ Loves(John, Alice)
o Implication (→): Student(x) → Studies(x) (If x is a student, then x studies)
o Negation (¬): ¬Loves(John, Mary) (John does not love Mary)
3. Quantifiers in FOL:
o Universal Quantifier (∀ - "for all")
 Example: ∀x Student(x) → Studies(x)
 Meaning: "All students study."
o Existential Quantifier (∃ - "there exists")
 Example: ∃x Teacher(x) ∧ Teaches(x, Math)
 Meaning: "There exists a teacher who teaches Math."

3. Differences Between First-Order Logic (FOL) and Propositional Logic (PL)

Feature First-Order Logic (FOL) Propositional Logic (PL)

Uses predicates, variables, and
Representation Uses only simple propositions
quantifiers
More expressive, can represent Less expressive, only represents
Expressiveness
relationships and general rules specific facts
∀x (Human(x) → Mortal(x)) (All Human → Mortal (Applies only
Example
humans are mortal) to a single case)
Quantifiers Uses ∀ (for all) and ∃ (there exists) No quantifiers
Used in AI, databases, and automated Used in simple logic circuits, rule-
Application
reasoning based systems
4. Real-World Examples of First-Order Logic in AI

A. Expert Systems (Medical Diagnosis)

 ∀x (Flu(x) → HasFever(x) ∧ Coughs(x))

 Meaning: "If a person has the flu, they will have a fever and cough."
 Used in AI-powered medical diagnosis systems to infer diseases based on
symptoms.

B. Natural Language Processing (NLP)

 Sentence: "Every student in the class passed the exam."

 FOL Representation: ∀x (Student(x) → PassedExam(x))
 Used in chatbots, language translation, and AI assistants.

C. Robotics and AI Planning

 ∀x (Robot(x) → CanMove(x))
 Meaning: "Every robot can move."
 Used in autonomous robots for motion planning.

5. Conclusion

First-Order Logic extends propositional logic by introducing predicates, variables, and

quantifiers, making it more expressive and useful in AI applications such as NLP, expert
systems, and robotics. While Propositional Logic is suitable for simple decision-making,
FOL is essential for advanced AI reasoning and automation.

2. Discuss the role of inference mechanisms like forward chaining and

backward chaining in communication systems.
Inference Mechanisms in Communication Systems: Forward Chaining and Backward
Chaining

1. Introduction

Inference mechanisms are essential in AI-driven communication systems for decision-

making, fault diagnosis, network optimization, and automated reasoning. Two primary
inference methods used in AI are:

 Forward Chaining (Data-Driven Inference)

 Backward Chaining (Goal-Driven Inference)

These techniques are widely applied in network security, intelligent routing,

troubleshooting, and AI-based decision-making in communication systems.

2. Understanding Forward Chaining and Backward Chaining

A. Forward Chaining (Data-Driven Inference)

Definition:

Forward chaining starts with known facts and applies rules to deduce new conclusions until
a goal is reached. It is data-driven, meaning it works from available data to infer new facts.

How It Works:

1. Start with initial facts.

2. Apply inference rules to derive new facts.
3. Continue iterating until the desired goal is found.

Example in Communication Systems – Network Intrusion Detection

 Problem: Detecting network intrusions based on packet behavior.

 Facts:
 o IF Unusual Traffic (SourceIP, DestinationIP)
o AND High Data Transfer Rate(SourceIP, DestinationIP)
o AND Repeated Access Attempts (SourceIP, DestinationIP)
o THEN Potential Attack (SourceIP, DestinationIP).

Python Implementation of Forward Chaining for Intrusion Detection

python
Copy Edit
class Inference Engine:
def __init__(self, rules):
self.rules = rules

def forward_chaining(self, facts):

inferred_facts = set(facts)
new_facts = True

while new_facts:
new_facts = False
for condition, conclusion in self.rules:
if condition.issubset(inferred_facts) and conclusion not in inferred_facts:
inferred_facts.add(conclusion)
new_facts = True

return inferred_facts

# Define rules for intrusion detection

rules = [
({"UnusualTraffic", "HighDataTransferRate"}, "SuspiciousActivity"),
({"SuspiciousActivity", "RepeatedAccessAttempts"}, "PotentialAttack")
]

# Given facts
initial_facts = {"UnusualTraffic", "HighDataTransferRate", "RepeatedAccessAttempts"}
# Apply forward chaining
engine = InferenceEngine(rules)
result = engine.forward_chaining(initial_facts)
print("Inferred Facts:", result)

🔹 Output Example: Inferred Facts: {'UnusualTraffic', 'HighDataTransferRate',

'RepeatedAccessAttempts', 'SuspiciousActivity', 'PotentialAttack'}
🔹 Effectiveness: This approach automates intrusion detection in AI-powered
cybersecurity.

B. Backward Chaining (Goal-Driven Inference)

Definition:

Backward chaining starts with a goal and works backwards to check if the available facts
support the conclusion. It is goal-driven, meaning it looks for evidence to prove or
disprove a hypothesis.

How It Works:

1. Start with the goal (what needs to be proven).

2. Look for rules that lead to the goal.
3. Check if facts support those rules.
4. Continue until the goal is proven or disproven.

Example in Communication Systems – Network Fault Diagnosis

 Problem: Diagnosing a faulty network connection.

 Goal: Determine if NetworkDown.
 Rules:
o IF No Internet Access(x) ∧ RouterOffline(x) → THEN Network Down(x).
o IF Cable Disconnected(x) ∨ ISP Failure(x) → THEN No Internet Access(x).
o IF Router Not Responding(x) ∨ Power Failure(x) → THEN Router Offline(x).
Python Implementation of Backward Chaining for Network Fault Diagnosis
python
Copy Edit
def backward_chaining (goal, rules, known_facts):
if goal in known_facts:
return True

for condition, conclusion in rules:

if conclusion == goal:
if all(backward_chaining(fact, rules, known_facts) for fact in condition):
return True
return False

# Define rules for network diagnosis

rules = [
({"NoInternetAccess", "RouterOffline"}, "NetworkDown"),
({"CableDisconnected", "ISPFailure"}, "NoInternetAccess"),
({"RouterNotResponding", "PowerFailure"}, "RouterOffline")
]

# Known facts
known_facts = {"CableDisconnected", "RouterNotResponding"}

# Check if NetworkDown can be inferred

goal = "NetworkDown"
result = backward_chaining(goal, rules, known_facts)
print(f"Is {goal} inferred?:", result)

🔹 Output Example: Is NetworkDown inferred?: True

🔹 Effectiveness: This approach efficiently troubleshoots network failures in smart
communication systems.

3. Comparison of Forward Chaining and Backward Chaining

 Feature Forward Chaining Backward Chaining

Goal-driven (starts from the

Approach Data-driven (starts from facts)
goal)

Real-time monitoring (e.g., Troubleshooting (e.g., Network

Use Case
Intrusion detection) fault diagnosis)

Focused on proving a specific

Complexity Can generate many conclusions
goal

Example in AI-based traffic management, Network security, AI-powered

Communication dynamic packet routing error correction

4. Real-World Applications of Inference Mechanisms in Communication Systems

Inference
Application Real-World Example
Mechanism

AI-based cybersecurity (e.g., detecting

Intrusion Detection Forward Chaining
DDoS attacks)

Automated troubleshooting in telecom

Network Fault Diagnosis Backward Chaining
networks

Traffic Routing in 5G
Forward Chaining Dynamic network path optimization
Networks

AI-Driven Spam Filtering Backward Chaining Email spam classification

5. Conclusion

Inference mechanisms like Forward Chaining and Backward Chaining play a critical role
in optimizing AI-driven communication systems.

 Forward Chaining is ideal for real-time decision-making (e.g., intrusion detection,

traffic optimization).
  Backward Chaining is better suited for troubleshooting and diagnostics (e.g.,
network fault analysis, spam filtering).

These AI-based reasoning methods enhance efficiency, security, and automation in modern
telecommunication networks, cybersecurity, and intelligent communication systems.

3. Design a first-order logic (FOL) knowledge base to model an AI-driven

communication system that includes:
●Devices (e.g., Mobile, Router, Server)
● Communication types (e.g., Wired, Wireless)
● Data transmission rules (e.g., "A device can send data if it is
connected to a network")
● Security policies (e.g., "Only authenticated users can access private
networks")
Do the following tasks:

a) Define predicates and functions to represent the system.

b) Write at least five FOL statements modeling the rules.
c) Use forward chaining or backward chaining to infer whether a mobile
device can send data over a secured network.

AI-Driven Communication System in First-Order Logic (FOL)

1. Introduction

First-Order Logic (FOL) provides a formal representation for modeling AI-driven

communication systems. It helps define devices, communication types, data transmission
rules, and security policies, ensuring that AI-based networks operate securely and
efficiently.

2. (a) Define Predicates and Functions to Represent the System

We define entities, predicates, and functions to model the system.

1. Entities (Constants)

 Devices: Mobile, Router, Server

 Communication Types: Wired, Wireless
  Users: Alice, Bob
 Networks: Public_Network, Private_Network

2. Functions

 Connected(Device, Network): Device is connected to a network.

 UserOf(Device, User): A user owns or operates a device.

3. Predicates

 CanSendData(Device): Device can send data.

 IsPrivate(Network): Network is private.
 RequiresAuthentication(Network): Private network requires authentication.
 Authenticated(User): User is authenticated.
 HasAccess(Device, Network): Device has access to a network.

3. (b) Write Five FOL Statements to Model the Rules

Rule 1: A device can send data if it is connected to a network.

∀d,n(Connected(d,n)→CanSendData(d))\forall d, n (Connected(d, n) \rightarrow

CanSendData(d))∀d,n(Connected(d,n)→CanSendData(d))

➡ "If a device is connected to a network, it can send data."

Rule 2: Private networks require authentication.

∀n(IsPrivate(n)→RequiresAuthentication(n))\forall n (IsPrivate(n) \rightarrow

RequiresAuthentication(n))∀n(IsPrivate(n)→RequiresAuthentication(n))

➡ "If a network is private, it requires authentication."

Rule 3: Only authenticated users can access a private network.

∀d,u,n(UserOf(d,u)∧Authenticated(u)∧IsPrivate(n)→HasAccess(d,n))\forall d, u, n
(UserOf(d, u) \wedge Authenticated(u) \wedge IsPrivate(n) \rightarrow HasAccess(d,
n))∀d,u,n(UserOf(d,u)∧Authenticated(u)∧IsPrivate(n)→HasAccess(d,n))

➡ "A device can access a private network if its user is authenticated."

Rule 4: A device can send data if it has access to a network.

∀d,n(HasAccess(d,n)→CanSendData(d))\forall d, n (HasAccess(d, n) \rightarrow

CanSendData(d))∀d,n(HasAccess(d,n)→CanSendData(d))

➡ "If a device has access to a network, it can send data."

Rule 5: A mobile device is connected to a wireless network.

Connected(Mobile,Wireless)Connected(Mobile, Wireless)Connected(Mobile,Wireless)

➡ "The mobile device is connected to a wireless network."

4. (c) Using Forward Chaining to Infer Whether a Mobile Device Can Send Data Over a
Secured Network

Given Facts:

 Connected(Mobile, Wireless)
 IsPrivate(Wireless)
 UserOf(Mobile, Alice)
 Authenticated(Alice)
Inference Using Forward Chaining

1. Applying Rule 2:
o IsPrivate(Wireless) → RequiresAuthentication(Wireless) ✅
o Inference: RequiresAuthentication(Wireless).
2. Applying Rule 3:
o UserOf(Mobile, Alice) ∧ Authenticated(Alice) ∧ IsPrivate(Wireless) →
HasAccess(Mobile, Wireless) ✅
o Inference: HasAccess(Mobile, Wireless).
3. Applying Rule 4:
o HasAccess(Mobile, Wireless) → CanSendData(Mobile) ✅
o Inference: CanSendData(Mobile).

Final Conclusion:

✔ The mobile device can send data over the secured wireless network! 🚀

5. Conclusion

 We defined FOL predicates and functions to model an AI-driven communication

system.
 We wrote 5 FOL rules to represent data transmission, authentication, and
security policies.
 Using forward chaining, we inferred that the mobile device can send data over a
secured network.

4. Develop an ontology for an AI-based smart city communication system

that includes:
● Entities: Sensors, IoT devices, Traffic Management, Emergency
Services, Network Nodes.
● Categories and Objects: Vehicle types, Traffic signals,
Communication protocols.
● Relationships: "A sensor detects traffic congestion", "Emergency
vehicles receive priority communication".
Do the following tasks:
a) Draw an ontology diagram or provide a structured hierarchical
representation.
b) Formulate first-order logic rules for key relationships (e.g., "If
congestion is detected, the AI system optimizes traffic lights").
c) Explain how AI inference mechanisms (e.g., knowledge graphs, rule-
based reasoning) can enhance decision-making in smart city
communication.

(a) Structured Hierarchical Representation

Below is a structured ontology representation for an AI-driven smart city communication
system:

1. Entities

 Sensors: Traffic Sensors, Pollution Sensors, Weather Sensors

 IoT Devices: Smart Cameras, Smart Streetlights, Smart Traffic Signs
 Traffic Management: Traffic Lights, AI Traffic Control System
 Emergency Services: Ambulances, Fire Trucks, Police Vehicles
  Network Nodes: Base Stations, Communication Towers, Edge Servers

2. Categories and Objects

 Vehicle Types: Private Cars, Public Transport, Emergency Vehicles

 Traffic Signals: Red, Yellow, Green, Adaptive Signals
 Communication Protocols: 5G, V2X (Vehicle-to-Everything), MQTT, HTTP

3. Relationships

 Detects(Sensor, TrafficCongestion): A sensor detects traffic congestion.

 Prioritizes(TrafficSystem, EmergencyVehicle): Emergency vehicles receive priority
communication.
 Optimizes(AI_TrafficSystem, TrafficSignals): AI optimizes traffic lights based on
congestion.
 Uses(NetworkNode, CommunicationProtocol): A network node uses a specific
communication protocol.
 Transmits(Data, IoT_Device, NetworkNode): IoT devices send real-time data to
network nodes.

(b) First-Order Logic (FOL) Rules for Key Relationships

Rule 1: If congestion is detected, the AI system optimizes traffic lights

∀s,c,t(Detects(s,c)∧IsTrafficCongestion(c)→Optimizes(AITrafficSystem,t))\forall s, c, t
(Detects(s, c) \wedge IsTrafficCongestion(c) \rightarrow Optimizes(AI_TrafficSystem,
t))∀s,c,t(Detects(s,c)∧IsTrafficCongestion(c)→Optimizes(AITrafficSystem,t))

➡ "If a sensor detects traffic congestion, the AI traffic system optimizes traffic lights."

Rule 2: Emergency vehicles receive priority communication

∀v,t(IsEmergencyVehicle(v)→Prioritizes(AITrafficSystem,v))\forall v, t
(IsEmergencyVehicle(v) \rightarrow Prioritizes(AI_TrafficSystem,
v))∀v,t(IsEmergencyVehicle(v)→Prioritizes(AITrafficSystem,v))

➡ "If a vehicle is an emergency vehicle, the AI system prioritizes its communication."

Rule 3: Sensors send traffic data to the AI control system

∀s,d(Detects(s,d)→Transmits(d,s,AITrafficSystem))\forall s, d (Detects(s, d) \rightarrow

Transmits(d, s, AI_TrafficSystem))∀s,d(Detects(s,d)→Transmits(d,s,AITrafficSystem))

➡ "If a sensor detects traffic data, it transmits the data to the AI-based traffic system."

Rule 4: A network node communicates using a specific protocol

∀n,p(Uses(n,p)→IsCommunicationProtocol(p))\forall n, p (Uses(n, p) \rightarrow

IsCommunicationProtocol(p))∀n,p(Uses(n,p)→IsCommunicationProtocol(p))

➡ "If a network node uses a protocol, then it must be a valid communication protocol."

Rule 5: AI reroutes emergency vehicles if congestion is detected

∀e,c(IsEmergencyVehicle(e)∧Detects(Sensor,c)→Reroutes(AITrafficSystem,e))\forall e, c
(IsEmergencyVehicle(e) \wedge Detects(Sensor, c) \rightarrow Reroutes(AI_TrafficSystem,
e))∀e,c(IsEmergencyVehicle(e)∧Detects(Sensor,c)→Reroutes(AITrafficSystem,e))

➡ "If an emergency vehicle is present and congestion is detected, the AI system reroutes
the vehicle."

(c) How AI Inference Mechanisms Enhance Decision-Making in Smart Cities

AI-based inference mechanisms, such as knowledge graphs and rule-based reasoning,
play a crucial role in optimizing smart city communication systems.

1. Knowledge Graphs for Context-Aware Decision-Making

 What? A knowledge graph connects entities, relationships, and rules, enabling AI

to infer real-time actions.
 Example:
o If TrafficSensor1 detects congestion on Road_A, the AI system queries the
knowledge graph to reroute vehicles dynamically.

2. Rule-Based Reasoning for Traffic Optimization

 What? Rule-based reasoning applies FOL rules to make dynamic decisions.

 Example:
o Input: "Ambulance approaching intersection"
o Rule Applied: "If an emergency vehicle is detected, AI prioritizes its
passage."
o Action: AI changes traffic lights to allow smooth passage.

3. AI-Driven Predictive Analysis for Communication

 Predictive AI analyzes past congestion patterns and adjusts signals before

gridlocks occur.
 Example:
o AI learns that congestion occurs daily at 8 AM on Highway_1.
o Proactive Action: AI adjusts signal timing to reduce delays.

Conclusion

 We developed an ontology with entities, categories, and relationships.

 We formulated FOL rules to model traffic optimization and emergency
prioritization.
  AI inference mechanisms, such as knowledge graphs and rule-based reasoning,
significantly enhance smart city decision-making.

5. Consider a wireless communication network where multiple users share

bandwidth. The system must allocate bandwidth based on user priority,
data load, and available spectrum.
Do the following tasks.:
a) Formulate this as a Constraint Satisfaction Problem (CSP) by defining:
● Variables (e.g., user devices, frequency channels)
● Domains (e.g., available bandwidth)
● Constraints (e.g., "No two users in the same region can use the same
frequency simultaneously")
b) Apply backtracking search and local search to find an optimized
bandwidth allocation.
c) Explain how machine learning (e.g., reinforcement learning) can
improve CSP-based resource allocation.

(a) Formulating as a Constraint Satisfaction Problem (CSP)

A wireless communication network must allocate bandwidth to multiple users efficiently

while considering priority, data load, and available spectrum. This problem can be modeled
as a Constraint Satisfaction Problem (CSP) with the following components:

1. Variables

 Users: U1,U2,...,UnU_1, U_2, ..., U_nU1,U2,...,Un (each user requiring bandwidth)

 Frequency Channels: F1,F2,...,FmF_1, F_2, ..., F_mF1,F2,...,Fm (available
frequency channels)
 Bandwidth Allocation: B(Ui)B(U_i)B(Ui) (bandwidth assigned to user UiU_iUi)

2. Domains
  Bandwidth Options: {Bmin,Bmed,Bmax}\{B_{\text{min}}, B_{\text{med}}, B_{\
text{max}}\}{Bmin,Bmed,Bmax} (minimum, medium, and maximum bandwidth)
 Frequency Channels Available: {F1,F2,...,Fm}\{F_1, F_2, ..., F_m\}{F1,F2,...,Fm}

3. Constraints

1. No two users in the same region can use the same frequency simultaneously (to
avoid interference):

∀Ui,Uj,(Region(Ui)=Region(Uj)∧Ui≠Uj)→F(Ui)≠F(Uj)\forall U_i, U_j, \quad

(Region(U_i) = Region(U_j) \wedge U_i \neq U_j) \rightarrow F(U_i) \neq
F(U_j)∀Ui,Uj,(Region(Ui)=Region(Uj)∧Ui=Uj)→F(Ui)=F(Uj)

2. Higher-priority users get more bandwidth:

∀Ui,Uj,(Priority(Ui)>Priority(Uj))→B(Ui)≥B(Uj)\forall U_i, U_j, \quad

(Priority(U_i) > Priority(U_j)) \rightarrow B(U_i) \geq B(U_j)∀Ui,Uj,(Priority(Ui
)>Priority(Uj))→B(Ui)≥B(Uj)

3. Total allocated bandwidth cannot exceed available spectrum:

∑B(Ui)≤Btotal\sum B(U_i) \leq B_{\text{total}}∑B(Ui)≤Btotal

4. Users must receive at least their minimum required bandwidth:

B(Ui)≥Breq(Ui)B(U_i) \geq B_{\text{req}}(U_i)B(Ui)≥Breq(Ui)

(b) Applying Backtracking Search and Local Search for Bandwidth Allocation

1. Backtracking Search (Constraint-Based Approach)

 Algorithm:
1. Assign bandwidth and frequency to the first user.
2. Check constraints (e.g., no interference, priority requirements).
3. If constraints are violated, backtrack and reassign frequencies.
4. Repeat until all users are assigned bandwidth.
  Example:

o User 1 (High priority): Assigned F1, B_max ✅

o User 2 (Low priority, same region as User 1): Cannot use F1, tries F2 ✅
o User 3 (Medium priority, different region): Can reuse F1 ✅

2. Local Search (Optimization-Based Approach)

 Algorithm:
1. Start with an initial bandwidth allocation.
2. Make small adjustments (swap bandwidth, reassign frequencies).
3. Evaluate if the new allocation reduces constraint violations.
4. Accept better allocations and continue until an optimal solution is found.

 Example:

o If User A has F1 but is causing interference, try F2.

o If User B has B_min but can take B_med without violating constraints,
increase it.

(c) Machine Learning for Improved CSP-Based Resource Allocation

1. Reinforcement Learning (RL) for Dynamic Bandwidth Allocation

 RL-based agents can learn optimal bandwidth assignments over time by interacting
with the network environment.
 State: Network conditions (users, spectrum availability).
 Action: Assign bandwidth to users dynamically.
 Reward: Higher network efficiency and fewer constraint violations.

2. Advantages of RL over CSP Methods

 Adaptive: Learns from real-time network changes.

 Efficient: Finds near-optimal solutions faster than exhaustive CSP searches.
 Scalable: Works well in large-scale networks with thousands of users.
 Conclusion

 We formulated bandwidth allocation as a CSP with variables, domains, and

constraints.
 We applied backtracking search (constraint satisfaction) and local search
(optimization).
 Reinforcement Learning provides an adaptive, scalable approach to improve
resource allocation dynamically.

6.A telecom company wants to build an AI-based network diagnostic

assistant that can represent, infer, and solve network issues. The system
should:
● Categorize network issues into hardware, software, and bandwidth-
related problems.
● Infer causes and suggest solutions using knowledge representation
techniques.
Do the following tasks:
1. Define a Knowledge Representation model using Semantic Networks
or Frames for telecom issues.
2. Write First-Order Logic (FOL) rules to represent diagnostic
knowledge.
3. Show an inference example where AI suggests a solution for a
network failure.

AI-Based Network Diagnostic Assistant

1. Knowledge Representation Model

To represent network issues, we can use Semantic Networks or Frames.

(a) Semantic Network Representation

A Semantic Network is a graph where nodes represent entities (e.g., network issues, causes,
and solutions), and edges represent relationships between them.
Entities and Relationships

 Network Issues:
o Hardware Issues → Router Failure, Cable Damage
o Software Issues → Configuration Error, Firmware Bug
o Bandwidth Issues → High Latency, Packet Loss

 Causes and Solutions:

o Router Failure → Cause: Power Surge → Solution: Replace Router
o Configuration Error → Cause: Misconfiguration → Solution: Reset &
Update Configurations
o High Latency → Cause: Network Congestion → Solution: Optimize
Bandwidth Allocation

(b) Frame-Based Representation

A Frame represents each network issue with slots and values.

Frame: Router Failure

yaml
CopyEdit
NetworkIssue: RouterFailure
Type: Hardware Issue
Cause: Power Surge
DetectionMethod: No Signal from Router
Solution: Replace Router or Reset Power
Frame: High Latency
yaml
CopyEdit
NetworkIssue: HighLatency
Type: Bandwidth Issue
Cause: Network Congestion
DetectionMethod: Ping Test Shows High Response Time
Solution: Optimize Bandwidth, Reduce Load
2. First-Order Logic (FOL) Rules for Diagnostics

(a) Rule 1: Categorizing Issues

∀x(IsNetworkIssue(x)∧IsHardwareIssue(x)→RequiresPhysicalCheck(x))\forall x
(IsNetworkIssue(x) \wedge IsHardwareIssue(x) \rightarrow
RequiresPhysicalCheck(x))∀x(IsNetworkIssue(x)∧IsHardwareIssue(x)→RequiresPhysicalC
heck(x))

➡ "If a network issue is hardware-related, a physical check is required."

(b) Rule 2: Diagnosing Router Failure

∀x(NoSignal(x)∧DeviceType(x,Router)→Issue(x,RouterFailure))\forall x (NoSignal(x) \
wedge DeviceType(x, Router) \rightarrow Issue(x,
RouterFailure))∀x(NoSignal(x)∧DeviceType(x,Router)→Issue(x,RouterFailure))

➡ "If a router has no signal, classify it as a Router Failure."

(c) Rule 3: Diagnosing High Latency

∀x(HighPingTime(x)∧HighNetworkLoad(x)→Issue(x,HighLatency))\forall x
(HighPingTime(x) \wedge HighNetworkLoad(x) \rightarrow Issue(x,
HighLatency))∀x(HighPingTime(x)∧HighNetworkLoad(x)→Issue(x,HighLatency))

➡ "If ping time is high and network load is high, classify as High Latency."

(d) Rule 4: Recommending Solutions

∀x(Issue(x,RouterFailure)→Solution(x,ReplaceRouter))\forall x (Issue(x, RouterFailure) \
rightarrow Solution(x,
ReplaceRouter))∀x(Issue(x,RouterFailure)→Solution(x,ReplaceRouter))

➡ "If the issue is a Router Failure, suggest replacing the router."

3. Inference Example: Diagnosing a Network Failure

Problem Statement:

A customer reports no internet connectivity.

 The diagnostic system runs tests and finds:

o Router has no signal
o Ping test shows no response

Step 1: Apply FOL Rules

 Rule 2 applies → Since NoSignal(Router) is detected, it classifies the issue as

RouterFailure.
 Rule 4 applies → Since RouterFailure is identified, it suggests ReplaceRouter.

Step 2: AI Suggests a Solution

 AI Output:
o "The router is not responding. Likely cause: Hardware failure due to power
surge. Suggested solution: Try resetting the router. If the issue persists, replace
the router."

Conclusion

 Semantic Networks and Frames effectively model telecom issues.

 FOL rules enable structured diagnostics.
 Inference using forward chaining allows AI to suggest solutions dynamically.