K. Inoue, C. Sakama, Abductive Framework for Nonmonotonic Theory Change. Proceedings IJCAI'95, 1995. 22  Home/Search   Document Details and Download   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....[KR98] The work builds on earlier proposals in [DK96] and [ELM 96, LMMR97, LMMR98] for learning simpler forms of abductive theories. The use of abduction in learning, either in an implicit or explicit form, has recently been examined by several works [Abe98, AD94, AD95, Coh92, DRB92a, Moo98, IS95, KK98, Sak98] The abductive assumptions generated during learning are then used in different ways depending on the kind of learning task the system is performing. In this thesis, abduction is used explicitly as the basic covering relation for defining the concept learning problem. In many other ....

K. Inoue and C. Sakama. Abductive framework for nonmonotonic theory change. In Proceedings of the 14th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 204--210, 1995.

....# is consistent. Some remarks are in order. First, this definition is generic both in terms of syntax and semantics. Often, the syntax is that of normal logic programs with negation as failure but some have investigated the use of abduction in the context of extended logic programming [43] or constraint logic programming [56, 60, 66] At the level of semantics, the above definition defines the notion of an abductive solution in terms of any given semantics of standard logic programming. Each particular choice of semantics defines its own entailment relation = its own notion of ....

....it provided a flexible platform on which the company could easily experiment with changes in policy and preferences. Extended and Preference Abduction. In order to broaden the applicability of ALP in AI and databases, Inoue and Sakama propose two kinds of extensions of ALP: Extended abduction [43] and Preference abduction [44] An abductive program in the framework of extended abduction is a pair of logic programs possibly including negation as failure and disjunctions. Each instance of element of is abducible. An explanation of a ground literal G consists of a pair of sets (I , O) ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

K.Inoue and C. Sakama. Abductive framework for nonmonotonic theory change. In: Proceedings of IJCAI-95, pages 204--210, Morgan Kaufmann, 1995.

....that abduction can play a central role in addressing a variety of problems in Artificial Intelligence. These problems include diagnosis [Poole et al. 1987; Console et al. 1996] planning [Missiaen et al. 1995; Kakas et al. 2000; Shanahan, 2000] knowledge assimilation and belief revision, [Inoue and Sakama, 1995; Pagnucco, 1996] multi agent coordination, Ciampolini et al. 2000; Kowalski and Sadri, 1999] and knowledge intensive learning [Muggleton, 2000; Mooney, 2000] The essential feature of this abductive approach to problem solving is the fact that it allows the application problems to be ....

K. Inoue and C. Sakama. Abductive framework for nonmonotonic theory change. In Proceedings of IJCAI-95, pages 204--210, 1995.

.... di erent sources of information or preferring certain data over another [4, 9] and approaches that are based on rewriting rules for representing the information in a speci c form [25] As in our case, abduction is used for database updating in [28] and an extended form of abduction is used in [26, 39] to explain modi cations in a theory. The use of three valued logics is also a well known technique for maintaining incomplete or inconsistent information; such logics are often used for de ning xpoint semantics of incomplete logic programs [19, 42] and so in principle they can be applied on ....

K.Inoue, C.Sakama. Abductive framework for nonmonotonic theory change. Proc. IJCAI'95 , pp.204-210, 1995.

....extended this system with an optimizing component that will allow us to compute preferred coherent solutions to restore the consistency of the database. Our approach is related to other work on the use of abduction in the context of databases. 16] proposed to use abduction for database updating. [15, 27] developed a framework for explaining or unexplaining observations by an extended form of abduction in which arbitrary formulas may be added or formulas of the theory may be removed. In this paper, the focus is on a di erent application of abduction, namely composition and integrity restoration of ....

K.Inoue, C.Sakama. Abductive framework for nonmonotonic theory change. Proc. IJCAI'95 , 204-210, 1995.

....object. Inheritance is used to inherit, as much as possible, rules from objects higher in the hierarchy into the objects lower down, i.e. as long as they do not con ict with the rules of the more speci c objects. Other approaches to updates of logic programs by logic programs are presented in [25] and in [38] Based on an abductive framework for (non monotonic) auto epistemic theories, that make use of the notion of negative explanation and anti explanation, in [25] the authors de ne autoepistemic updates . Based on this work, in [38] they employ this new abduction framework (in this ....

....with the rules of the more speci c objects. Other approaches to updates of logic programs by logic programs are presented in [25] and in [38] Based on an abductive framework for (non monotonic) auto epistemic theories, that make use of the notion of negative explanation and anti explanation, in [25] the authors de ne autoepistemic updates . Based on this work, in [38] they employ this new abduction framework (in this case rewritten for logic programming instead) to compute minimal programs which result from updating one logic program by another. In their framework, several updates are ....

K. Inoue and C. Sakama. Abductive framework for nonmonotonic theory change. In IJCAI'95, pages 204-210. Morgan Kaufmann, 1995.

....the application of abstraction techniques to reduce the size of the state space; and infinite state systems are abstracted to (possibly equivalent) finite state systems. For example, in the context of SCR, Heitmeyer et al. 21] illustrate how both explicit state model checkers, such as Spin [23], and symbolic model checkers, like SMV [34] can be used to detect safety violations in SCR specifications. The first type of model checking verifies system properties by means of state exploration, whereas the second technique uses reasoning by refutation. Problems related to state explosion are ....

Inoue, K., and Sakama, C. (1995). Abductive Framework for Non-monotonic Theory Change. International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 1, pp. 204-210

....di erent abductive logic frameworks. Another way in which the de nition is generic is the choice of the syntax. In most applications, the syntax is that of normal logic programs with negation as failure but some have investigated the use of abduction in the context of extended logic programming [37] or constraint logic programming [49] When integrity constraints IC are introduced in the formalism, one must de ne how they constrain the abductive solutions. There are di erent views on this. Early work on abduction in Theorist in the context of classical logic [70] was based on the ....

....been integrated [54] with Inductive Logic Programming to allow a form of machine learning under incomplete information. Extended and Preference Abduction In order to broaden the applicability of ALP in AI and databases, Inoue and Sakama propose two kinds of extensions of ALP: Extended abduction [37] and Preference abduction [38] Extended abduction is an extension of an abductive inference method that does not only infer new abductive atoms but may also remove abductive atoms given in the abductive program. Several methods were proposed for computing extended abduction. 39] proposed a ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

K.Inoue and C. Sakama. Abductive framework for nonmonotonic theory change. In: Proceedings of IJCAI-95, pages 204-210, Morgan Kaufmann, 1995.

.... without causing contradictions [Kakas et al. 98] This type of inference procedure has been shown to be suitable for addressing different kinds of problems in AI, such as diagnosis [Console et al. 96] planning [Esghsi 98] and database updates [Console et al. 94; Kakas Mancarella 90; Inoue Sakama 95] Recent work has also shown its application in knowledge based software engineering [Menzies 96] Using abduction for theory change (e.g. database updates) the observation is a request for a particular change (update) and abduction is the process of identifying the changes to be made to ....

.... [Menzies 96] Using abduction for theory change (e.g. database updates) the observation is a request for a particular change (update) and abduction is the process of identifying the changes to be made to a given theory so that the new theory satisfies the request [Kakas Mancarella 90; Inoue Sakama 95] A request can be, 4 for example, a requirement for information to be a consequence of a given theory, or for it to be no longer inferred from a given theory. In the first case, abduction provides an explanation of the given information, whereas in the second case, it provides an ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

K. Inoue and C. Sakam, "Abductive Framework for Non-monotonic Theory Change". Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI '95), 1:204-210, 1995.

....notions of minimal,weak and Reiter extensions in default logic, the semantics for auto epistemic logic based on different notions of groundedness and the various semantics for logic programming with negation. have been advocated by, among others, 10] and the authors [11] In a recent paper by [5] a mixed approach is proposed, where both retractions and expansions can be used to restore S consistency for a given (nonmonotonic) theory T . Secondly, in nonmonotonic theory revision there is no clear idea about what should constitute a minimal change of the current theory, i.e. what should be ....

....in order to guarantee that revision by retraction cannot be applied successfully. We prove that for minimal revision, revision by expansion requires a cumulative and reflexive back up semantics. This shows that there may be room for the mixed revision proposal such as proposed by Inoue and Sakama ([5]) To show the generality of the framework proposed, we also apply it to updating in nonmonotonic theories and prove similar results. 2 Preliminaries Let L be a (nonempty) language. An inference relation j : 2 L L is a relation between a set of propositions A and a proposition f. We will ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

K. Inoue, C. Sakama, Abductive Framework for Nonmonotonic Theory Change. Proceedings IJCAI'95, 1995.

.... which is in particular attractive for knowledge representation and reasoning methods, and thus adds to the application perspective of this field [1] In this paper, we study the enhancement of model checking by abductive reasoning, which is a major technique in AI and knowledge representation, cf. [40, 16, 31, 3, 29, 19, 42, 4]. The work presented does not exhaustively treat this issue, and further work is necessary; however, it is a first step towards an integration of model checking with AI techniques, and may stimulate other work in this direction. The main contributions of the present paper can be summarized as ....

....change. Interestingly, this problem is an intermingled abductive reasoning and theory revision problem, which is best understood as an abductive theory revision problem. In fact, the system repair problem can be modeled as an abductive theory revision problem in the frameworks IFIG RR 9701 3 of [33, 29]. Note that the close relationship between abduction and revision is wellrecognized, and its investigation received increasing interest more recently, e.g. 5, 29, 33, 34] ffl We show that the proposed framework for system repair can be profitably used, by providing an application to the repair ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Inoue K., Sakama, Ch., Abductive Framework for Nonmonotonic Theory Change. In Proc. IJCAI '95, pp. 204--210, 1995.

....more changes. In particular, we have shown that whenever the backup semantics is cumulative, syntactically minimal recovery operators for nonmonotonic theories have to be expansions in order to be successful. This result can be related to the approach to theory recovery of Inoue and Sakama (see [6]) where they propose to revise a theory T by means of a minimal set of additions I and removals O such that R(T ) T I Gamma O has an acceptable model. Their proposal thus comes down to advocating a mixed recovery approach. Our results show that, whenever R is a mixed recovery that satisfies ....

K. Inoue, C. Sakama, Abductive Framework for Nonmonotonic Theory Change. Proceedings IJCAI'95, 1995.

....further investigation. However, we intend to address this issue by considering abductive ( hypothetical ) reasoning. Abduction can help identify, for each inconsistency, which facts to add and or delete in order to resolve the inconsistency. Work in this area by [Kakas Mancarella 1990] and [Inoue Sakama 1995] is relevant. Specifically, given an inconsistency a a in a specification S, the abductive approach described in [Inoue Sakama 1995] allows the identification of pairs of the form (A, R) where A is the set of facts to add to S and R is the set of facts to remove from S, such that the new ....

....help identify, for each inconsistency, which facts to add and or delete in order to resolve the inconsistency. Work in this area by [Kakas Mancarella 1990] and [Inoue Sakama 1995] is relevant. Specifically, given an inconsistency a a in a specification S, the abductive approach described in [Inoue Sakama 1995] allows the identification of pairs of the form (A, R) where A is the set of facts to add to S and R is the set of facts to remove from S, such that the new specification S = S A) R no longer contains the original inconsistency (i.e. S A) R :d a a) For each inconsistency, alternative ....

K. Inoue and C. Sakam, "Abductive Framework for Non-monotonic Theory Change". In Proceeding of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI '95), V.1, 204-210, 1995.

....the set T is a diagnosis iff T is a solution to the insertion update problem pf ddb, insert(A: c,d] T . Abduction provides the framework for characterizing a probabilistic diagnostic problem as an insert update request. In a related work for non probabilistic framework Inoue and Sakama in [6] proposed a method for nonmonotonic theory change using abduction. Kakas and Mancarella[7] emphasized database updates and has not discussed formal characterization of updates and diagnosis. Recently, Ngo and Haddawy[10] proposed a method to represent probabilistic logic programs by assigning a ....

K. Inoue and Sakama C. Abductive Framework for NonMonotonic Theory Change. In Proceedings of the 14th International Joint Conference in Artificial Intelligence, pages 204--210, 1995.

No context found.

K. Inoue and C. Sakama. Abductive framework for nonmonotonic theory change. In: Proceedings of IJCAI-95, pages 204--210, Morgan Kaufmann, 1995.

No context found.

K. Inoue and C. Sakama. Abductive framework for nonmonotonic theory change. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-95), pages 204--210, Morgan Kaufmann, 1995.

....explains the observation f lies(tweety) The traditional abduction cannot characterize such a situation. That is, abduction introduces hypotheses to a knowledge base, but once they are included, any hypothesis cannot be removed from the knowledge base. To cope with this problem, Inoue and Sakama [19] introduced the notion of negative explanations . Given a background knowledge base K and an observation G, a set F of hypotheses is called a negative explanation of G if K F = G where K F is consistent. An explanation E satisfying K #E = G is then called a positive explanation. ....

....does not fly any more. Since f lies(opus) is entailed by K, we now have to revise the knowledge base to block the derivation of f lies(opus) by assuming, for instance, broken wing(opus) This situation is characterized by the notion of antiexplanations which are used to unexplain observations [19]. Given a background knowledge base K and an observation G, a set E of hypotheses is called a (positive) anti explanation of G if K # E # = G, and a set F of hypotheses is called a negative anti explanation of G if K F # = G. These extensions of traditional abduction are called ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

K. Inoue and C. Sakama, Abductive framework for nonmonotonic theory change, in: Proceedings of the 14th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Morgan Kaufmann, 1995, pp. 204--210.

....answer set; otherwise P is inconsistent. If a literal L is included in every answer set of P , it is written as P = L; otherwise P # = L. When P is inconsistent, we define P = false. An abductive framework used in this paper is the extended abduction introduced by Inoue and Sakama [11]. An abductive program is a pair # P, A # where P is an ELP and A # LP is a set of literals from the language of P called 2 abducibles. 1 Any instance A of an element from A is also called an abducible and is written as A # A. Without loss of generality, we assume that any rule from ....

....base which contains variable knowledge and invariable knowledge. When there is a request for inserting deleting knowledge to from the knowledge base, the update request on invariable knowledge is translated into updates on variable knowledge. This type of updates is called view updates. 1 In [11], P and A are given as autoepistemic theories. Here we consider a formulation in logic programming. 2 If there is a rule A # # with an abducible A and a non empty body # , then A is made a non abducible by introducing a rule A # A # with a new abducible A # . 3 Definition 3.1. Let P be a ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

K. Inoue and C. Sakama. Abductive framework for nonmonotonic theory change. In: Proc. IJCAI-95, pages 204--210, Morgan Kaufmann.

....and Electronics Engineering Kobe University Rokkodai, Nada, Kobe 657 8501, Japan inoue eedept.kobe u.ac.jp Chiaki Sakama Dept. Computer and Communication Sciences Wakayama University Sakaedani, Wakayama 640 8441, Japan sakama sys.wakayama u. ac.jp Abstract Extended abduction introduced by Inoue and Sakama (1995) generalizes traditional abduction in the sense that it can compute negative explanations by removing hypotheses from a nonmonotonic background theory, rather than only adding them. Also, it has a mechanism of computing anti explanations to unexplain negative observations. Such extended ....

....knowledge base to explain the observation f lies(tweety) The traditional abduction cannot characterize such a situation. That is, abduction introduces hypotheses to a knowledge base, but once they are included, any hypothesis cannot be removed from the knowledge base. To cope with this problem, Inoue and Sakama (1995) introduced the notion of negative explanations . Given a background knowledge base K and an observation G, a set F of formulas is called a negative explanation of G if K n F j= G where K nF is consistent. An explanation E satisfying K [ E j= G is then called a positive explanation. On the ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

K. Inoue and C. Sakama (1995). Abductive framework for nonmonotonic theory change. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 204--210, Morgan Kaufmann.

....conditions: 1. K [ E j= O , 2) 2. K [ E [ fO 0 g is consistent. Namely, E, together with K, implies O and K [ E satisfies O 0 . Note that in traditional abduction (1) the second condition is simply stated as K[E is consistent. 2 Similar extensions are in [ Ade and Denecker, 1995; Inoue and Sakama, 1995; Dimopoulos and Kakas, 1996 ] Example 2.1 Consider the knowledge base K wet shoes wet grass; wet grass sprinkler on; wet grass rained; wet umbrella rained; with A = f rained; sprinkler on g. Suppose that we observe that shoes are wet but the umbrella is not wet. The situation is ....

....effect is achieved by introducing disjunction. With this transformation, information at the initial stage is preserved in the revised knowledge base, which would be helpful when one wants to recover the prior knowledge base. This is in contrast to the approaches in [ Kakas and Mancarella, 1990; Inoue and Sakama, 1995 ] where abduction causes removal of facts from a knowledge base. ....

K. Inoue and C. Sakama. Abductive framework for nonmonotonic theory change. In: Proc. IJCAI-95, pages 204--210, Morgan Kaufmann.

No context found.

K. Inoue, C. Sakama, Abductive Framework for Nonmonotonic Theory Change. Proceedings IJCAI'95, 1995. 22

No context found.

Inoue K., Sakama, Ch., Abductive Framework for Nonmonotonic Theory Change. In Proc. IJCAI '95, pp. 204--210, 1995.

No context found.

) K. Inoue and C. Sakama. Abductive framework for nonmonotonic theory change. In Proceedings of the 14th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 204--210, 1995.

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC