Prioritized Autoepistemic Logic
نویسنده
چکیده
An important problem in data and knowledge representation is the possibility of default rules that conflict. If the application of both of two default rules leads to a contradiction, they cannot both be applied. Systems that support the use of default rules may either remain indifferent or prioritize one rule over the other. In this paper a prioritized version of autoepistemic logic is presented. Priorities determine a subset of all stable expansions of a set, the preferred stable expansions. The priority notion is declarative, unlike e.g. some recent approaches to priorities in default logic that modify the semi-constructive definition of extensions of Reiter. Computationally the new priority notion can nevertheless be seen as a mechanism for pruning search trees in procedures for autoepistemic reasoning, as demonstrated by procedures given in the
منابع مشابه
Digital Systems Laboratory Series A: Research Reports Priorities and Nonmonotonic Reasoning Priorities and Nonmonotonic Reasoning
Many knowledge-based systems use some kind of priorities for controlling their reasoning. In this work, autoepistemic logic is extended with priorities. Priorities are formalized as partial orders of formulae that express that some formulae are preferred to others. Priorities increase the set of conclusions that can be inferred from a set of formulae, because the number of cases where connicts ...
متن کاملEliminating the Fixed Predicates from a Circumscription
Parallel predicate circumscription is the primary circumscriptive technique used in formalizing commonsense reasoning. In this paper we present a direct syntactic construction for transforming any parallel predicate circumscription using fixed predicates into an equivalent one which does not. Thus, we show that predicate circumscription is no iiiore expressive with fixed predicates than without...
متن کاملReflective Autoepistemic Logic and Logic Programming
In this paper we show that reflexive autoepistemic logic of Schwarz is a particularly convenient modal formalism for studying properties of answer sets for logic programs with classical negation and disjunctive logic programs. Syntactical properties of logic programs imply that a natural interpretation of default logic in the logic of minimal knowledge (nonmonotonic S4F) provides also a modal r...
متن کاملSeparating Disbeliefs from Beliefs in Autoepistemic Reasoning
This paper investigates separated autoepistemic logic which is a generalization of Moore's autoepistemic logic with separate modalities for belief and disbelief. Along the separation of beliefs and disbeliefs, the relationship between autoepistemic logic and default logic becomes very intuitive. Straightforward ways of translating default theories into separated autoepistemic theories and back ...
متن کاملA Complete Logic for Autoepistemic Membership
The driving force behind the theory of non-monotonic reasoning is the wish to draw conclusions in the face of missing information. Therefore, one way to understand non-monotonic reasoning is to realize that not only knowledge, but also absence of knowledge enables certain conclusions. Among other theories of knowledge and ignorance, Moore’s autoepistemic logic is a conscientious elaboration of ...
متن کامل