Martha C. Mayer and Fiora Pirri. Abduction is not Deduction-in-Reverse. Journal of the Interest Group in Pure and Applied Logics, 4(1):1--14, 1996.  Home/Search   Document Details and Download   Summary   Related Articles   Check

.... (instance of a) hypothesis h 2 H such that T [ h j= moreover, T [ h is required to be consistent (cf. 14 ] this is the strong notion of abduction) A hypothesis h is generally considered to be a solution to an abductive problem only if a number of additional requirements are satisfied (cf. 11 ] For example, a solution to an abductive problem should be as simple as possible. More general, some hypotheses are preferred over others. Another requirement on a solution is that it should be a most specific instance of a hypothesis. A solution h is also said to cover . Perhaps even more ....

Martha C. Mayer and Fiora Pirri. Abduction is not Deduction-in-Reverse. Journal of the Interest Group in Pure and Applied Logics, 4(1):1--14, 1996.

.... (instance of a) hypothesis h 2 H such that T [ h j= moreover, T [ h is required to be consistent (cf. 15 ] this is the strong notion of abduction) A hypothesis h is generally considered to be a solution to an abductive problem only if a number of additional requirements are satis ed (cf. 12 ] For example, a solution to an abductive problem should be as simple as possible. More general, some hypotheses are preferred over others. Another requirement on a solution is that it should be a most speci c instance of a hypothesis. A solution h is also said to cover . Perhaps even more ....

Martha C. Mayer and Fiora Pirri. Abduction is not Deduction-in-Reverse. Journal of the Interest Group in Pure and Applied Logics, 4(1):1-14, 1996.

....pas du probl eme de l explication des observations trop sp ecifiques ou trop g en erales. Ils fournissent un proc ed e, li e a la d efinition de Poole d explications moins pr esomptives [Poole 1989] pour pr ef erer des explications en tenant compte de liens d abstraction. Pour leur part, [Cialdea Mayer Pirri 1996, Lobo Uzc ategui 1997, Aliseda 1998] etudient les logiques non monotones pour des explications, ainsi que [Lifschitz, 1997] qui le fait encore d un autre point de vue. Enfin, Sakama Inoue 1998] compare la notion de g en eralit e comme crit ere pour ordonner les explications tant en ....

M. Cialdea-Mayer and F. Pirri. Abduction is not deduction-in-reverse. IGPL, 4:1--14, 1996.

....We will assume Sigma to be a consistent set of sentences in a finite propositional language L and Ab a set of propositional letters from L. Any formula built using only letters from Ab will be an abducible formula in AbF orm. Given an observation ff, the process of abduction is usually defined ([14, 17, 3, 11, 20, 4]) as the task of finding a consistent subset Delta of AbF orm such that Sigma [ Delta ff . In our example above, Sigma will be the implication (1) ff will be grass is wet and Delta the set frained last nightg. However, this formal description covers only part of the effects one can ....

....more detail. In particular, it will include the study of relations of the form F , where F is defined based on orders over sets of formulas. The study of these relations will bring closer our approach of abduction to other approaches in the literature (for instance, the work of Cialcea and Pirri [3], where they study properties of the relation fl is a preferred explanation of ff ) Another open question is how to deal with infinite languages. The main obstacle is that the cautious explanation is ill defined and thus AA is meaningless. However, there is a way to state AA that avoids the ....

M. Cialdea Mayer and F. Pirri. Abduction is not deduction-in-reverse. Journal of the IGPL, 4(1):1--14, 1996.

....the output data has to be analyzed and then, in the best case, it will be explained by the background theory. How rational is abduction Following what is known for deduction, this problem can be approached by isolating rationality postulates or rules that abductive reasoning should conform to ([1, 11, 8]) Which criterions can be used to isolate such principles A way of attacking the last problem is suggested by the examples above which shows that an important aspect of abduction is the set of conclusions to which the best explanation leads to. In other words, the consequences implied by the ....

....by Levesque in [6] as a new deductive operation that would be useful when doing what if experiments. We were saying above that the problem of measuring the rationality of abduction can be reduced to that of measuring the rationality of j ab . The former problem has been considered already in [8, 1], where they presented rationality postulates for a relation similar to fl is a preferred explanation of ff , we will comment about them in the sequel. The latter problem (the rationality of an abstract consequence relation) has been the focus of much research for many years. We will use the ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

M. Cialdea Mayer and F. Pirri. Abduction is not deduction-in-reverse. Journal of the IGPL, 4(1):1--14, 1996.

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