Default-assumption consequence relations in a preferential setting: Reasoning about normality
نویسندگان
چکیده
We attempt at a logical characterization of reasoning about normality based on the intuition that a normal situation is represented by a stable set of default assumptions. Within the context of preferential consequence relations we shall define a normality operator B and study its logical properties. Finally we shall focus on the AGM-like postulates for the normality expansion, contraction and revision.
منابع مشابه
Reasoning with power defaults
This paper introduces power default reasoning (PDR), a framework for nonmonotonic reasoning based on the domain-theoretic idea of modeling default rules with partial-information in a higher-order setting. PDR lifts a non-monotonic operator at the base (syntactic) level to a well-behaved, almost monotonic operator in the higher-order space of the Smyth power-domain – effectively a space of sets ...
متن کاملNon Monotonic Reasoning and Belief
The major approaches to belief revision and non monotonic reasoning proposed in the literature diier along a number of dimensions, including whether they are \syntax-based" or \semantic-based", \foundational" or \coherentist", \consistence{restoring" or \inconsistency{tolerant". Our contribution towards clarifying the connections between these various approaches is threefold: We show that the t...
متن کاملNonmonotonic Logics and Their Algebraic Foundations
The goal of this note is to provide a background and references for the invited lecture presented at Computer Science Logic 2006. We briefly discuss motivations that led to the emergence of nonmonotonic logics and introduce two major nonmonotonic formalisms, default and autoepistemic logics. We then point out to algebraic principles behind the two logics and present an abstract algebraic theory...
متن کاملRelations between assumption-based approaches in nonmonotonic logic and formal argumentation
In this paper we make a contribution to the unification of formal models of defeasible reasoning. We present several translations between formal argumentation frameworks and nonmonotonic logics for reasoning with plausible assumptions. More specifically, we translate adaptive logics into assumption-based argumentation and ASPIC, ASPIC into assumption-based argumentation and a fragment of assump...
متن کاملA Formula-Preferential Base for Paraconsistent and Plausible Reasoning Systems
We provide a general framework for constructing natural consequence relations for paraconsistent and plausible nonmonotonic reasoning. The framework is based on preferential systems whose preferences are based on the satisfaction of formulas in models. We show that these natural preferential systems that were originally designed for paraconsistent reasoning fulfill a key condition (stopperednes...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
دوره شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2007