Engelfriet, J., and J. Treur (1996). Specification of Nonmonotonic Reasoning. Proc. International Conference on Formal and Applied Practical Reasoning, FAPR'96, Springer-Verlag, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 1085, pp. 111-125.  Home/Search   Document Details and Download   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....knows at a particular instant. We will extend this logic so that we can also say something about the changing knowledge of the agent over time. Originally, this extended logic was intended as a means of specifying nonmonotonic reasoning processes and of reasoning about its properties (see [ET94] [ET96], En95] The idea is that a temporal formula describes the nonmonotonic inferences the agent has to perform during the course of a reasoning process (analogously to the use of temporal logic for specifying computer processes) But these inferences should also be the only cause of increases in ....

J. Engelfriet, J. Treur, "Specification of nonmonotonic reasoning", in: D.M. Gabbay, H.J. Ohlbach (eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference on Formal and Applied Practical Reasoning, FAPR'96, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 1085, Springer-Verlag, 1996, pp. 111-125

No context found.

Engelfriet, J., and J. Treur (1996). Specification of Nonmonotonic Reasoning. Proc. International Conference on Formal and Applied Practical Reasoning, FAPR'96, Springer-Verlag, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 1085, pp. 111-125.

....been addressed yet. Disjoint from the area of meta level architectures, a temporal perspective on the semantics of reasoning processes has been very fruitful to obtain semantics, temporal specification languages, and simulation environments for of nonmonotonic reasoning processes; cf. 13] 14] [16]. A specific type of nonmonotonic reasoning is based on default logic. In [12] 15] 22] different aspects of semantics and specification of default reasoning processes have been analysed in more depth. 23 Acknowledgements This work was partially supported by ESPRIT III Basic Research Action ....

Engelfriet J., and Treur J. Specification of Nonmonotonic Reasoning. Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics, vol. 10, 2000, pp. 7-27

....The intermediate reasoning steps can be formalised as traces of information states, as briefly sketched in Section 1.2. To specify the dynamics of such traces variants of temporal logic can be used. For specific classes of nonmonotonic reasoning methods this has been worked out in [7] 8] [9]. 42 The semantic framework for reasoning components introduced here can be incorporated in a semantic formalisation of a compositional reasoning system, as presented in [4] In [4] the semantic formalisation of the functionality of a primitive component was left open; it was taken as an assumed ....

Engelfriet J., and Treur J. Specification of Nonmonotonic Reasoning. Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics, vol. 10, 2000, pp. 7-27

....is used to specify and verify processes in general. If a class of processes can be specified accurately by a form of temporal logic which can be executed, we have a general execution mechanism for this class. In this paper we studied the class of nonmonotonic reasoning processes (see also [EHT95] [ET95]) These processes can be described semantically by the reasoning traces they produce. Viewing these traces as temporal models, they can be specified by temporal rules. We have shown that a fragment of infinitary temporal epistemic logic is suitable for 12 describing any set of traces (see [ET93] ....

Engelfriet, J., Treur, J. : "Specification of Nonmonotonic Reasoning", Technical Report, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 1995.

....other well known approaches. For example, the general connections between the two levels developed in the current paper provide connections between preferential semantics and default logic (cf. ETH 87] VOO 93] as a special case. Part of the material in this paper was previously published in [ET 96] Apart from the two levels of abstraction considered here, EHT 95] distinguishes three more levels of abstraction. Sections 2, 3 and 4 review and extend some of the material presented there. 2. Belief state frames Classical (propositional) logic lies at the basis of most nonmonotonic ....

Engelfriet, J., Treur, J. : "Specification of Nonmonotonic Reasoning", in: D.M. Gabbay, H.J. Ohlbach (eds.), Practical Reasoning, Proceedings FAPR'96, LNAI 1085, Springer-Verlag, 1996, pp. 111-125.

....patterns leading to the outcomes are specified instead of (only) the outcomes of the reasoning. In related and future research the notion of a trace for a nonmonotonic reasoning process is taken as a point of attention, and we have used a temporal epistemic logic to specify such traces (e.g. [17], following the line of [15] 16] Of course, a set of (multiple) reasoning traces generates a belief set operator by considering only the start and endpoints of the traces. The dualism between multiple outcomes and multiple reasoning traces of a nonmonotonic reasoning process is also studied in ....

J. Engelfriet and J. Treur, Specification of nonmonotonic reasoning, in: Practical reasoning, Proceedings FAPR'96, eds. D.M. Gabbay and H.J. Ohlbach, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 1085, SpringerVerlag, pp. 111--125.

....of changing the specification for the traces is by introducing so called lemma default rules are (see e.g. Sch92] This causes conclusions to be added earlier in a trace. A specification language for belief set operators and reasoning trace operators based on temporal logic was introduced in [ET96]. Further issues for research include representability of belief set operators and reasoning trace operators using default logic (as mentioned in Section 5) and the general question of representability using finitary default logic (with infinite sets of defaults) ....

J. Engelfriet and J. Treur. Specification of Nonmonotonic Reasoning. To appear in Proceedings of the International Conference on Formal and Applied Practical Reasoning, 1996.

....same set of initial beliefs. If we want to describe the reasoning of the agent exhaustively, we may incorporate traces starting with any set of initial beliefs. To specify such sets of temporal models (or traces) temporal logic can be used. This general temporal view of reasoning was put forth in [ET96], where we introduced a formal notion of temporal model, and a temporal specification language suited to specify sets of temporal models. In the current paper a design and specification of an executable nonmonotonic reasoning system to implement this generic approach to nonmonotonic reasoning is ....

....reasoning systems, DESIRE can be viewed as an advanced theorem proving environment in which both the knowledge and the control of the reasoning can be specified in an explicit, declarative and compositional manner. In this paper, in Section 2 we briefly summarize the generic approach introduced in [ET96]. In Section 3 a very brief introduction to DESIRE is presented. In Section 4 the design of the nonmonotonic reasoning system is discussed. An example trace of the system is described in Section 5, and Section 6 gives conclusions and suggestions for further research. 2 Temporal Specification of ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Engelfriet, J., Treur, J. : "Specification of Nonmonotonic Reasoning", in: D.M. Gabbay, H.J. Ohlbach (eds.), Practical Reasoning, International Conference on Formal and 15 Applied Practical Reasoning, FAPR'96, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 1085, Springer-Verlag, 1996, pp. 111-125

....at that time, so a state is an epistemic one. A number of examples in which a temporal logic is used to specify reasoning processes can be found in [ET94] where such specifications are introduced for default logic (see [Re80] classical inference systems and meta level architectures. Also, in [ET95] it is shown that there exists a large class of reasoning processes that can be specified in this temporal logic. Therefore it seems justified to study this temporal logic formalism in more detail, which will be done in the present paper. In section 2 we will introduce the temporal logic which is ....

.... also [PS92] Technical Report IR 388, Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam 21 So, minimal consequence is harder than TELC consequence (which is ## 1 P complete, or co NP complete) provided that the polynomial hierarchy does not collapse (see [Jo90] In [ET95] a sublanguage of the subjective part of L TEL is proposed as a specification language for (conservative) reasoning processes and it is shown that this language is suited for this task. We will now look at the complexity of minimal entailment restricted to this language. Let H 0 be an ....

J. Engelfriet, J. Treur, "Specification of Nonmonotonic Reasoning", in: Proceedings of the Dutch AI Conference, NAIC '95, 1995, pp. 297-306

....processes in general. If a class of processes can be specified accurately by a form of temporal logic which can be executed, we have a general execution mechanism for this class. In this paper we studied the class of nonmonotonic reasoning processes (see also (Engelfriet, Herre and Treur, 1995) (Engelfriet and Treur, 1996)) These processes can be described semantically by the reasoning traces they produce. Viewing these traces as temporal models, they can be specified by temporal rules. We have shown that a fragment of infinitary temporal epistemic logic is suitable for describing any set of traces (see ....

Engelfriet, J., Treur, J. (1996). Specification of Nonmonotonic Reasoning. To appear in: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Formal and Applied Practical Reasoning, FAPR'96, SpringerVerlag.

....consider formulae that respect monotonicity, and in Section 4 conservative formulae will be treated. The practical implications of the results of this paper are discussed in Section 5. Section 6 gives conclusions and suggestions for further research. Part of the material in this paper appeared in (Engelfriet, 1996b) Monotonicity and Persistence in Preferential Logics 2. Some Preferential Logics In this section we will describe the following preferential logics: Ground S5, Minimal Temporal Epistemic Logic and Circumscription. Since we have already defined preferential entailment in general, for each ....

....a particular instant. We will extend this logic in such a way that we are also able to say something about the changing knowledge of the agent over time. Originally, this extended logic was intended as a means of specifying nonmonotonic reasoning processes and of reasoning about their properties (Engelfriet Treur, 1994, 1996; Engelfriet, 1996a) The idea is that a temporal formula describes the nonmonotonic inferences the agent has to perform during the course of a reasoning process (analogously to the use of temporal logic for specifying computer processes) But these inferences should also be the only cause of ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Engelfriet, J., & Treur, J. (1996). Specification of nonmonotonic reasoning. In Gabbay, D. M., & Ohlbach, H. J. (Eds.), Practical Reasoning, Proceedings FAPR'96, Vol. 1085 of Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 111--125. Springer-Verlag.

No context found.

Engelfriet, J., and J. Treur (1996a). Specification of Nonmonotonic Reasoning. Proc. International Conference on Formal and Applied Practical Reasoning, FAPR'96, Springer-Verlag, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 1085, pp. 111-125.

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