Let's say I have the following:
parent(alice, charlie).
parent(bob, charlie).
parent(bob, diane).
parent(alice, diane).
parent(bob, eve).
parent(alice, eve).
% people are siblings of each other if they share a parent
% and aren't the same person.
sibling(A, B) :-
parent(X, A),
parent(X, B),
B \= A.
Now if I ask for the siblings of Diane, I get Charlie and Eve — twice, once through Bob and once through Alice. I only want each once.
I don't think I can use a cut here, as that would prevent backtracking altogether. What I would like, is a way to check if any exists.
Paraphrasing
sibling(A, B) :-
∃(parent(X, A), parent(X, B)),
B \= A.
I tried several cuts, but none worked.
I tried findall/3
on (parent(X, A), parent(X, B))
and checking if the resulting list is non-empty, but that doesn't unify A or B.
Using setof/3
as suggested below works, but I really want to find a way to incorporate it in the definition of sibling/2
, instead of having to use it in the question. I'd really like to be able to do the following:
?- sibling(diane, X).
X = charlie ;
X = eve ;
false.
or this
?sibling(X, Y).
X = charlie,
Y = diane ;
X = charlie,
Y = eve ;
X = diane,
Y = charlie ;
X = diane,
Y = eve ;
X = eve,
Y = charlie ;
X = eve,
Y = diane ;
false.
Like I said below, I have a solution for this specific case. What I would like, and what I'm setting a bounty for, is a general solution.
Instead of
sibling(A, B) :-
setof(D, X^(parent(X, A), parent(X, D)), Ds),
member(B, Ds),
B \= A.
I'd like to do
sibling(A, B) :-
exists(X^(parent(X, A), parent(X, B))),
B \= A.
which unifies A
and B
.
How do I define exists/1
?
Using cut in Prolog is very delicate. Most cuts are essentially incorrect, but work still in certain situations. You could use a cut here, provided you want exactly one answer. But since you want the entire set, you are out of luck: You need to explore all answers to determine that set.
Fortunately, there is an elegant shortcut (pun intended) for that: setof/3
. So ask
?- setof(t, sibling(diane, S), _).
For this usage of setof/3
, the last argument is of no interest. It is actually [t]
.
For a general purpose exists/1
, define
exists(XGoal) :- setof(t, XGoal, _).
This allows the use of existential quantifiers.