A generalised framework for reasoning with multi-point events

  • R. Wetprasit
  • A. Sattar
  • L. Khatib
Session 3
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1345)


Allen's Interval Algebra (IA) and Vilain and Kautz's Point Algebra (PA) consider an interval and a point as basic temporal entities (i.e., events) respectively. However, in many real world situations we often need to deal with recurring events that include multiple points, multiple intervals or combinations of points and intervals. Recently, we presented a multiple-point event (MPE) framework to represent relations over recurring point events and showed that it can handle pointisable interval relations (SIA). We also showed that computing a minimal MPE network is a polynomial solvable problem. However, the MPE framework cannot correctly capture the relation between three points called a discontinuous point relation and this has not been satisfactorily addressed in the literature. In this paper, we extend MPE to a general framework that is expressive enough to represent discontinuous point relations and other complex situations which are relationships between single events (i.e., point-interval, and interval-interval relations), and clusters of events (i.e., recurring point-point and interval-interval relations). Further we developed a path-consistency algorithm for computing the minimal network for a generalised MPE network and improved our earlier path-consistency algorithm for MPE networks. We then present an analysis of experimental results on the implementation of these algorithms.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    J. Allen. Maintaining knowledge about temporal intervals. Communication of the ACM, 26(11):832–843,1983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    M.G. Kahn, J.C. Ferguson, E.H. Shortliffe, and L.M. Fagan. Representation and use of temporal information in oncocin — cancer therapy planning program. In M.K. Chytil and R. Engelbrecht, editors, Medical Expert Systems: Using Personal Computers, pages 35–4. Sigma press, Cheshire, 1987.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    L. al Khatib. Reasoning with Non-Convex Time Intervals. PhD thesis, Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne, Florida, 1994.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    I.S. Kohane. Temporal Reasoning in Medical Expert Systems. PhD thesis, MIT Laboratory for Computer Science, Technical Report TR-389, Cambridge, 1987.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    P. Ladkin. Time representation: A taxonomy of interval relations. In Proceedings of AAAI-86, pages 360–366, San Mateo: Morgan Kaufman, 1986.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    P. Ladkin and A. Reinefeld. Effective solution of qualitative interval constraint problems. Artificial Intelligence, 57(1):105–124, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    P. Ladkin and A. Reinefeld. Fast algebraic methods for interval constraint problems. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, to appear, 1996.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    A.K. Mackworth. Consistency in networks of relations. Artificial Intelligence, 8:99–118, 1977.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    A.K. Mackworth. Constraint satisfaction. Technical report, 85-15, Department of Computer Science, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada, 1985.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    R. Morris, W. Shoaff, and L. Khatib. Path consistency in a network of non-convex intervals. In Proceedings of the 13th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-93), pages 650–655, Chamberey, France, 1993.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    B. Nebel. Solving hard qualitative temporal reasoning problems: Evaluating the efficiency of using the ord-horn class. Constraints, 1:175–190,1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    K. Nökel. Temporally distributed symptoms in technical diagnosis. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, 517, 1991.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    M. Poesio and R.J. Brachman. Metric constraints for maintaining appointments: Dates and repeated activities. In Proceedings in AAAI-91, pages 253–259, Anaheim, CA, 1991.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    P. van Beek. Exact and approximate reasoning about qualitative temporal relations. Technical report, TR-90-29, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, 1990.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    P. van Beek and R. Cohen. Exact and approximate reasoning about temporal relations. Computational Intelligence, 6:132–144,1990.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    P. van Beek and D.W. Manchak. The design and an experimental analysis of algorithms for temporal reasoning. Journal of AI Research, 4:1–18, 1996.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    M. Vilain and H. Kautz. Constraint propagation algorithms for temporal reasoning. In Proceedings of AAAI-86, pages 377–382, San Mateo, 1986. Morgan Kaufman.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    R. Wetprasit, A. Sattar, and L. Khatib. Reasoning with multi-point events. In Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 1081; Advances in AI, Proceedings of the eleventh biennial conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 26–40, Toronto, Ontario, Ca, 1996. Springer. The extended abstract published in Proceedings of TIME-96 workshop, pages 36–38, Florida, 1996. IEEE.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. Wetprasit
    • 1
  • A. Sattar
    • 1
  • L. Khatib
    • 2
  1. 1.Knowledge Representation and Reasoning Unit School of Computing and Information TechnologyGriffith UniversityNATHANAustralia
  2. 2.Computer Science ProgramFlorida Institute of TechnologyMelbourneUSA

Personalised recommendations