Skip to main content

Lazy Knowledge Base Update

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Engineering of Intelligent Systems (IEA/AIE 2001)

Abstract

Knowledge base update has been given much attention in the AI literature. The best-known solution to this problem is Winslett’s PMA formalism. In this paper we propose different intuitions standing behind knowledge base update. Roughly speaking, we consider an update formula α not as an effect of an action to be performed, but rather as an observation about dynamically changing world made by an agent. This observation, if it is consistent with the knowledge base, is assumed to be just a new piece of information about the world. Otherwise, it is assumed that a single action has been performed and α is its, usually partial, effect.

We formalize our approach using Dijkstra’s semantics. We also examine the properties of our update operator with respect to Katsuno and Mendelzon’s postulates.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. W. Ackermann. Uutersuchungen über das Eliminantionsproblem der mathematischen Logik. Mathematische Annalen, 110, 390–413, 1935.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. C. E. Alchourrón, P. Gärdenfors, D. Makinson. On the Logic of Theory Change: Partial Meet Contraction and Revision Functions. Journal of Symbolic Logic, 50, 1985, 510–530.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  3. G. Brewka, J. Hertzberg. How to Do Things with Worlds: on Formalizing Actions and Plans. Journal of Logic and Computation. Vol. 3, No. 5, 1993, 517–532.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  4. F. M. Brown. Boolean Reasoning. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  5. M-O. Cordier, P. Siegel. A Temporal Revision Model for Reasoning about World Change. In Int’l. Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, 732–739, Morgan Kaufmann, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  6. E. W. Dijkstra, C. S. Scholten. Predicate Calculus and Program Semantics. Springer-Verlag, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  7. P. Doherty, W. Lukaszewicz, E. Madalińska-Bugaj. The PMA and Relativizing Minimal Change for Action Update. Fundamenta Informaticae 44 (2000) 95–131.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. P. Doherty, W. Lukaszewicz, A. Sza las. Computing Circumscription Revisited: A Reduction Algorithm. Journal of Automatic Reasoning, 18, 1997, 297–336.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. A. Herzig. The PMA Revisited. In: Proc. of the 5th Int’l. Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, Morgan Kaufmann, 1996, 40–50.

    Google Scholar 

  10. G. Grahne. Updates and Counterfactuals. In Proc. of the 2nd Int’l. Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, Morgan Kaufmann, 1991, 269–276.

    Google Scholar 

  11. H. Katsuno, A. O. Mendelzon. On the Diffeerence between Updating a knowledge base and revising it. In: Proc. of the 2nd Int’l. Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, KR’91, Morgan Kaufmann, 1991, 387–395.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Madalińska-Bugaj, E. (dy1997) How to Solve Qualification and Ramification Using Dijkstra’s Semantics for Programming Languages, in: AI*IA-97: Advances in Artificial Intelligence, Proceedings of 5th Congress of the Italian Association for Artificial Intelligence, Springer-Verlag, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, 1321, 381–392, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  13. B. Nebel. A Knowledge Level Analysis of Belief Revision. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, 1989, 301–311.

    Google Scholar 

  14. M. Winslett. Updating Logical Databases. Cambridge Tracks in Theoretical Computer Science. Cambridge University Press, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  15. M. Winslett. Updating Logical Databases. In: D. Gabbay, A. Galton, J. A. Robinson (eds.).Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming. Vol. 4 (Epistemic and Temporal Reasoning), 1995, Oxford University Press, 133–174.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2001 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

ãukaszewicz, W., Madalińska-Bugaj, E. (2001). Lazy Knowledge Base Update. In: Monostori, L., Váncza, J., Ali, M. (eds) Engineering of Intelligent Systems. IEA/AIE 2001. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 2070. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45517-5_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45517-5_8

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-42219-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-45517-2

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics