Describe a film (entity and attribute) using the first order logic

Question

Good morning, I want to understand how can I describe something using the first order logic.

For example I want to describe what is a film (an entity) and what is an attribute (for example actor: Clooney) for the film. How can I describe that using the first order logic?

******* UPDATE ********

What I need to explain in first logic order is:

ENTITY: an element, an abstraction or an object that can be described with a set of properties or attributes. So I think that I must says that the entity has got a set of attributes with their respective values. An Entity describes an element, an abstraction or an object.

ATTRIBUTE: an attribute has always got a value and it always associated to an entity. It describes a specific feature/property of the entity.

DOCUMENT: a pure text description (pure text it not contains any html tags). Every document describes only ONE entity through its attribute.

Lemmons

Roman's answer is quite expressive, I think you need to add more explanation than your edit. Your edit is basically describing how logical propositions work, which has been explained in the answer below. – Beer

Answer 1

To state that an object has a certain property you would use a single place predicate. For example, to state that x is a film you could write Film(x). If you want to attribute some value to an object you can use two (or more) place predicate. Using your example you could say that Clooney starred in a film as Starred(clooney, x).

There are certain conventions that people use. For example, predicates start with capital letters (Actor, Film, FatherOf) and constants start with a lower case letter (x, clooney, batman). Constants denote objects and predicates say something about the objects. In case of predicates with more than one argument the first argument is usually the subject about which you are making the statement. That way you can naturally read the logical formula as a sentence in normal language. For example, FatherOf(x, y) would read as "x is the father of y".

Answer for the update:

I am not sure whether you can do that in first order logic. You could describe an Entity as something that has certain properties by formula such as

\forall x (Entity(x) ==> Object(x) | Element(x) | Abstraction(x))

This is a bit more difficult for the Attribute. In first order logic an attribute ascribes some quality to an object or relates it to another object. You could probably use a three place predicate as in:

\forall attribute (\exists object (\exists value (Has(object, attribute, value))))

As to the document, that would be just a conjunction of such statements. For example, the description of George Clooney could be the following:

Entity(clooney) & Has(clooney, starred, gravity) & Has(clooney, bornIn, lexington) & ...

Chickadee

Thanks Roman for your answer... I have updated my answer... It's a bit more complex... I don't need to describe a specifically film... I need to describe what is an Entity (FILM), an Attribute for it... Please take a look :D – Lemmons

Thanks for the update Roman, I think that your answer is the best... please could you update it also with the document definition? Than I will mark your answer as best! Regards and thank you so much – Lemmons

Answer 2

The typical way to do this is to explain that a specific object exists and this object has certain attributes. For example:

(∃x)(property1(x) & property2(x) & ~property3(x))

aka: There exists a thing that satisfies properties 1 and 2 but does not satisfy property 3.

Your current question formulation makes it unclear as to what you mean by attributes and documents. Perhaps towards your idea of attributes: it's possible to describe as the domain of property1 all the entities that satisfy it; so, for example, the domain of blue is all blue objects.

First-order logic has nothing to do with HTML -- are you trying to use HTML to represent an entity in first-order logic somehow? It remains incredibly unclear what your question is.

Intracellular

thanks for your answer. I have update my answer with more details... please see the UPDATE part of my question where there are all the things that I must describe using the first logic order.. I need a language that can help me to says what I have explained in words :D – Lemmons

@UsiUsi I saw your explanation and it is not helpful at all, I still have almost no idea what you're looking for. Your question does not seem, as it currently stands, to be appropriate for SO. – Intracellular