Distance Functions for Defaults in Reactive Systems

  • Sofia Guerra
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1816)


Default reasoning has become an important topic in software engineering. In particular, defaults can be used to revise specifications, to enhance reusability of existing systems, and to allow a more economic description of systems. In this paper we develop a framework for default specifications of reactive systems.

We present a formalisation of non-monotonicity in temporal logic based on the notion of default institution. Default institutions were defined as an extension of institutions in order to allow partial reuse of existing modules. The semantics of defaults is given by a (generalised) distance between interpretations. In this way, by defining a pre-order between temporal morphisms and using temporal logic as a specification language, we get a way of handling defaults in specifications of reactive systems. We illustrate the developed formalism with an example in which a specification is reused, but where the new behaviour contradicts the initial specification. In this example, the initial specification is seen as a default to which exceptions are added.


Temporal Logic Linear Temporal Logic Nonmonotonic Reasoning Default Reasoning Proposition Letter 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Stefan Brass, Udo Lipeck, and Pedro Resende. Specification of object behaviour with defaults. In Udo Lipeck and Gerhard Koschorreck, editors, Proceedings of the International Workshop on Information Systems: Correctness and Reusability, ISCORE-93, pages 155–177, 1993.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dov Gabbay, C. J. Hogger, and J. A. Robinson, editors. Nonmonotonic Reasoning and Uncertain Reasoning, volume 3 of Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Anthony Finkelstein and Ian Sommerville. The viewpoints FAQ. Software Engineering Journal, 11(1):2–4, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Joseph A. Goguen and Rod M. Burstall. Institutions: Abstract model theory for specification and programming. Journal of the ACM, 39(1):95–146, January 1992.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sofia Guerra. Defaults in the Specification of Reactive Systems. PhD thesis, Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade Técnica de Lisboa, 1999.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Udo W. Lipeck and Stefan Brass. Object-oriented system specification using defaults. In K. V. Luck and H. Marburger, editors, Management and Processing Complex Data Structures, Proceedings 3rd Workshop on Information Systems and Artificial Intelligence, volume LNCS 777, pages 22–43, Berlin, 1994. Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    David Makinson. General patterns in non-monotonic reasoning. In C. J. Hogger, and J. A. Robinson, editors. Nonmonotonic Reasoning and Uncertain Reasoning, volume 3 of Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994 Gabbay et al. [2], chapter 2, pages 35–110.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Leora Morgenstern. Inheritance comes of age: Applying nonmonotonic techniques to problems in industry. Artificial Intelligence, 103:237–271, 1998.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Amir Pnueli. The temporal logic of programs. In Proceedings of the 18th IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 46–57, 1977.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pierre-Yves Schobbens. Exceptions in Algebraic Specifications. PhD thesis, Université Catholique de Louvain, Faculté des Sciences Appliquées, 1992.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yoav Shoham. Chronological ignorance: Experiments in nonmonotonic temporal reasoning. Artificial Intelligence, 36:279–331, 1988.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    A. Sernadas, Cristina Sernadas, and J. F. Costa. Object specification logic. Journal of Logic and Computation, 5(5):603–630, 1995.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sofia Guerra
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity College LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations