Skip to main content

Descriptive Dynamic Logic and Its Application to Reflective Architectures

  • Chapter
  • 147 Accesses

Part of the book series: Handbook of Defeasible Reasoning and Uncertainty Management Systems ((HAND,volume 7))

Abstract

In Artificial Intelligence, Multi-Language Logical Architectures, MLA for short, (MC [Giunchiglia and Serefini, 1994; Giunchiglia and Traverso, 1991; Giunchiglia et al., 1993], BMS [Tan, 1992], ML 2 [Balder et al., 1993], DESIRE [Treur, 1992], MILORD — II [Agusti et al., 1991; Agusti et al.,1994; Sierra and Godo, 1993], OMEGA [Attardi and Simi, 1995], FOL [Weyhrauch, 1980]) are particular types of architectures, used to build knowledge-based systems, that play a major role in dealing with complex reasoning patterns, such as those involved in non-monotonic reasoning, scheduling or planning. Despite the fact that many commonalities can be intuitively found [F. Van Harmelen et al.,1993], there was a lack of formal frameworks to compare and describe them. These architectures are based on the use of several logical languages to define local theories (or meta-theories acting upon theories) that influence/modify each other. These influences are modeled by complex control patterns of the reasoning flow between system units (also called modules or contexts) containing different knowledge theories evolving in time. Furthermore, the control patterns are often dynamically changed at run time. Therefore, when trying to define a formal framework to describe multi-language architectures it is mandatory that such a framework be able to model this dynamic behaviour.

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

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover 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

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliography

  1. J. Agusti, F. Esteva, P. Garcia, L. Godo and C. Sierra. Combining multiple-valued logics in modular expert systems. In Proc. 7th Conf. on Uncertainty in AI, Morgan Kaufmann, Los Angeles, 17–25, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  2. J. Agusti, F. Esteva, P. Garcia, L. Godo, R. Lopez de Mantaras and C. Sierra. Local multi-valued logics in modular expert systems. J. Exper. Theoret. Artificial Intelligence, 6, 303–321, 1994.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. J.L. Arcos and E. Plaza. Inference and reflection in the object-centered representation language NOOS. Future Generation Computer System Journal„ 12, 119–121, 1996.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. G. Attardi and M. Simi. A formalisation of viewpoints. Fundamenta Informaticae, 23, 149–174, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  5. J. Balder, F. Van Harmelen and M. Aben. A KADS/(ML)2 model of a scheduling task. In Formal Specification of Complex Reasoning Systems, Jan Treur and Thomas Wetter (eds.), Ellis Horwood, Chichester, UK, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  6. M. Benerecetti and L. Spalazzi. Metafol: Program tactics and logic tactics plus reflection. Future Generation Computer System Journal„ 12, 139–156, 1996.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. M. Clavel and J. Meseguer. Axiomatizing reflective logis and languages. In Pmceedngs of Reflction ‘86, G. Kiczales, ed. pp. 263–288, Xerox PARC, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  8. E Giunchiglia and L. Serafini Multilanguage hierarchical logics (or: How we can do without modal logics). Artificial Intelligence, 65, 29–70, 1994.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. F. Giunchiglia and P. Traverso. Reflective reasoning with and between a declarative metatheory. IJCAI-91, 111–117, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Giunchiglia et al.,1993] F. Giunchiglia, P. Traverso and E. Giunchiglia. Multicontext systems as a specification framework for complex reasoning systems. In Formal Specification of Complex Reasoning Systems,Jan Treur and Thomas Wetter (eds.), Ellis Horwood, Chichester, UK, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  11. R. Goldblatt. Logics of time and computation. Lecture Notes, 7, CSLI, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  12. D. Harel. Dynamic logic. In Handbook of Phylosophical Logic, D.M. Gabbay and F. Guenthner (eds.), Reidel, Dordrecht, 497–604, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  13. F. Van Harmelen, R. Lopez de Mantaras, J. Malec and J. Treur. Comparing formal specification languages for complex reasoning systems. In Formal Specification of Complex Reasoning Systems, Jan Treur and Thomas Wetter (eds.), Ellis Horwood, Chichester, UK, 258–282, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  14. M. Manzano. Extensions of first order logic, Cambridge Tracts in Theoretical Computer Science. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  15. V.R. Pratt. Semantical cosnsiderations on floyd-hoare logic. Proc. 17th IEEE Symp. Found. Comput. Sci., 109–121, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  16. C. Sierra and L. Godo. Specifying simple scheduling tasks in a reflective and modular architecture. In Formal Specification of Complex Reasoning Systems, Jan Treur and Thomas Wetter (eds.), Ellis Horwood, Chichester, UK, 199–232, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  17. C. Sierra, L. Godo and R. Lopez de Mantaras. A dynamic logic framework for reflective architectures. In IJCAI-95 Workshop on Reflection and Meta-Level Architectures and their applications in AI, Mamdouh Ibrahim (ed.), 94–102, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Y.H. Tan. Non-monotonic Reasoning: Logical Architecture and philosophical applications. Ph.D. Thesis, Vrije Universitaet Amsterdam, Amsterdam, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  19. J. Treur. On the use of reflection principles in modelling comples reasoning. Internat. J. Intelligent Systems, 6, 277–294, 1992.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. J. Treur. Temporal semantics of meta-level architectures for dynamic control. Proc. META’94, Pisa, 1994, pp. 353–376, LNCS Vol. 883, Springer, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  21. R. Weyhrauch. Prolegomena to a theory of mechanized formal reasoning. Artificial Intelligence, 13, 133–170, 1980.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2002 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Sierra, C., Godo, L., De Mántaras, R.L., Manzano, M. (2002). Descriptive Dynamic Logic and Its Application to Reflective Architectures. In: Meyer, JJ.C., Treur, J. (eds) Agent-Based Defeasible Control in Dynamic Environments. Handbook of Defeasible Reasoning and Uncertainty Management Systems, vol 7. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-1741-0_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-1741-0_8

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-90-481-6109-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-017-1741-0

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics