Reasoning about Human Activities: an Argumentative Approach

نویسندگان

  • Juan Carlos Nieves
  • Esteban Guerrero
  • Helena Lindgren
چکیده

Recognizing and supporting human activities is an important challenge for ambient assisted living. In this paper we introduce a novel argumentation-based approach for dealing with human activity recognition. By considering a model of the world and a set of observations of the world, hypothetical fragments of activities are built. The hypothetical fragments of activities will be goal-oriented actions and they will be considered defeasible. Therefore we consider extension-based argumentation semantics for local selection of hypothetical fragments of activities. By considering degrees of fulfillment of activities and local selection, a global selection of hypothetical fragments of the activities is defined. Therefore, we can make explicit statements about why one hypothetical activity was performed.

برای دانلود رایگان متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

Metric for Security Activities Assisted by Argumentative Logic

Recent security concerns related to future embedded systems make enforcement of security requirements one of the most critical phases when designing such systems. This paper introduces an approach for efficient enforcement of security requirements based on argumentative logic, especially reasoning about activation or deactivation of different security mechanisms under certain functional and non...

متن کامل

Getting the Point of Conditionals: An Argumentative Approach to the Psychological Interpretation of Conditional Premises

Processes that govern the interpretation of conditional statements by lay reasoners are considered a key-issue by nearly all reasoning psychologists. An argumentative approach to interpretation is outlined, based on the idea that one has to retrieve the intention of the speaker to interpret a statement, and an argumentative based typology of conditionals is offered. Some empirical support to th...

متن کامل

Argumentative Logics: Reasoning with Classically Inconsistent Information

Classical logic has many appealing features for knowledge representation and reasoning. But unfortunately it is awed when reasoning about inconsistent information, since anything follows from a classical inconsistency. This problem is addressed by introducing the notions of \argument" and of \acceptability" of an argument. These notions are used to introduce the concept of \argumentative struct...

متن کامل

Argumentative Reasoning with ABEL

Most formal approaches to argumentative reasoning under uncertainty focus on the analysis of qualitative aspects. An exception is the framework of probabilistic argumentation systems. Its philosophy is to include both qualitative and quantitative aspects through a simple way of combining logic and probability theory. Probabilities are used to weigh arguments for and against particular hypothese...

متن کامل

A New Framework for ABMs Based on Argumentative Reasoning

We present an argumentative approach to agent-based modeling where agents are socially embedded and exchange information by means of simulated dialogues. We argue that this approach can be beneficial in social simulations, allowing for a better representation of agent reasoning, that is also accessible to the non computer science savvy, thus filling a gap between scholars that use BDI framework...

متن کامل

ذخیره 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 2013