Abstract
Many complex reasoning tasks have to deal with incomplete information. Reasoning systems trying to accomplish such a task contain basic knowledge that can be used to draw some conclusions about the domain, but may also have to make reasonable assumptions to be able to draw further conclusions. These assumptions usually reflect common sense knowledge about the domain, but sometimes have to be retracted in view of new evidence. A characteristic of this type of reasoning is that often several (conflicting) sets of assumptions exist which all lead to a coherent description of the domain. Any formalization of such reasoning processes has to take this into account. One of the logical approaches is Reiter’s default logic (e.g., see [Reiter, 1980; Besnard, 1989; Łukaszewicz, 1990]). A characteristic of default logic is that only after a complete set of (default) assumptions has been chosen, it can be checked whether it indeed gives an acceptable description of the domain. To be more specific, during the reasoning one meets a specific type of conditions (called justifications) in default rules to be applied, that cannot be fulfilled only on the basis of what has been derived until that moment. After application of a default rule, only in the future of the reasoning process it can be verified whether such a condition of the applied default rule will turn out to be justified or to be defeated. Therefore there is an essential temporal element in default reasoning. This suggests that a default rule can be given an interpretation as a temporal rule with one of its conditions referring to the future of the reasoning process. It seems that the process of actually constructing a set of coherent assumptions is reflected in Reiters approach to a certain extent, but without making the essential temporal element explicit. In this paper we will describe an interpretation of default logic in temporal epistemic logic. Notice that by temporal here a reference to internal time is meant: the reasoning is about a domain at a certain fixed point in time, but the reasoning system itself has an internal time over which its knowledge can vary.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Bibliography
G. Amati, L. C. Aiello, D. M. Gabbay and F. Pirri. A structural property on modal frames characterizing default logic, Journal of the IGPL, 4, 7–22, 1996.
G. Amati, L. C. Aiello and F. Puri. Definability and commonsense reasoning. In Third Symposium on Logical Formalization of Commonsense Reasoning,Stanford, USA, 1996.
J. F. A. K. van Benthem. The Logic of Time: a Model-theoretic Investigation into the Varieties of Temporal Ontology and Temporal Discourse, Reidel, Dordrecht, 1983.
P. Besnard.An Introduction to Default Logic, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1989.
P.Besnard and R. E. Mercer. Non-monotonic logics: a valuations-based approach.In Artificial Intelligence V. Methodology, Systems, Applications, B. du Boulay and V. Sgurev, eds. pp. 77–84. Elsevier Science Publishers, 1992.
P. Besnard and T. Schaub. Possible worlds semantics for default logics, Fundamenta Informaticae, 21, 39–66, 1994.
D. W. Etherington. A semantics for default logic. In Proceedings IJCAI-87,pp. 495–498; see also: Etherington, D.W., 1988, Reasoning with Incomplete Information,Morgan Kaufmann.
J. Engelfriet. Minimal temporal epistemic logic. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, special issue on Combining Logics, 1996.
J. Engelfriet and J. Treur. A temporal model theory for default logic. In Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning and Uncertainty, Proceedings ECSQARU’93, M. Clarke, R. Kruse and S. Moral, eds. pp. 91–96. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 747, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1993.
J. Engelfriet and J. Treur. Temporal theories of reasoning. In Logics in Artificial Intelligence: Proceedings of the 4th European Workshop on Logics in Artificial Intelligence, JELIA ‘84, C. MacNish, D. Pearce and L.M. Pereira, eds. pp. 279–299. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1994. Also in Journal of Applied Nonclassical Logics, 5, 239–261, 1995.
J. Engelfriet and J. Treur. Semantics for default logic based on specific branching time models. In Proceedings of the 12th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, W. Wahlster, ed. pp. 60–64. John Wiley & Sons, 1996.
Engelfriet et al.,1995] J. Engelfriet, H. Herre and J. Treur. Nonmonotonic belief state frames and reasoning frames (extended abstract). In Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning and Uncertainty: Proceedings ECSQARU’95,C. Froidevaux and J. Kohlas, eds. pp. 189–196. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 946, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1995.
M. Finger and D. M. Gabbay. Adding a temporal dimension to a logic system, Journal of Logic, Language and Information, 1, 203–233, 1992.
D. M. Gabbay. Intuitionistic basis for non-monotonic logic. In 6th Conference on Automated Deduction, G. Goos and J. Hartmanis, eds. pp. 260–273. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 138, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1982.
J. Y. Halpern and Y. Moses. Towards a theory of knowledge and ignorance In Proceedings of the Workshop on Non-monotonic Reasoning, AAAI’84,pp. 125–143. AAAI Press, Menlo Park, 1984.
W. van der Hoek, J.-J. Ch. Meyer and J. Treur. Temporalizing epistemic default logic. In Information Systems - Correctness and Reusability, Selected papers from the IS-CORE-95 Workshop,R. B. Feenstra and R. Wieringa, eds. pp. 173–190. World Scientific Publishers, London, 1995. Extended version to appear in Journal of Logic, Language and Information. Also in this Volume.
S. Kripke. Semantical analysis of intuitionistic logic. In Formal Systems and Recursive Function Theory, J. N. Crossley and M. Dummett, eds. North Holland, 1965
H. J. Levesque. A logic of implicit and explicit belief. In Proceedings National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI-84, pp. 198–202. William Kaufmann, 1984.
F. Lin and R. Reiter. Rules as actions: a situation calculus semantics for logic programs. To appear in Journal of Logic Programming, special issue on Reasoning about Action and Change, 1996.
F. Lin and Y. Shoham. A logic of knowledge and justified assumptions, Artificial Intelligence, 57, 271–289, 1992.
W. Lukaszewicz. Non-monotonic Reasoning: Formalization of Commonsense Reasoning, Ellis Horwood, New York, 1990.
V. W. Marek and M. Truszczynski. Nonmonotonic Logics; Context-dependent Reasoning, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1993.
V. W. Marek, G. F. Schwarz and M. Truszczynski. Modal nonmonotonic logics: ranges, characterization, computation, Journal of the ACM,40 963–990, 1993.
V. W. Marek and M. Truszczynski. More on modal aspects of default logic, Fundamenta Informaticae, 17, 99–116, 1992.
V. W. Marek and M. Truszczynski. Relating autoepistemic and default logics. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on the Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, pp. 276–288. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA, 1989.
D. McDermott and J. Doyle. Nonmonotonic logic I, Artificial Intelligence, 13, 41–72, 1980.
R. Reiter. A logic for default reasoning, Artificial Intelligence, 13, 81–132, 1980.
T. Schaub. Assertional default theories: a semantical view. In Proceedings of the Sec-ond International Conference on the Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, J. A. Allen, R. Fikes and E. Sandewall, eds. pp. 496–506. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA, 1991.
G. Schwarz. In search of a ‘true’ logic of knowledge: the nonmonotonic perspective, Artificial Intelligence, 79, 39–63, 1995.
G. Schwarz and M. Truszczynski. Minimal knowledge problem: a new approach, Artificial Intelligence, 67, 113–141, 1994.
J. Treur. Temporal semantics of meta-Level architectures for dynamic control of reason ing. In Logic Program Synthesis and Transformation - Meta-Programming in Logic: Proceedings LOPSTR’94 and META’94, L. Fribourg and F. Turini, eds. pp. 353–376. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 883, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1994.
F. Voorbraak. Preference-based semantics for nonmonotonic logics. In Proceedings IJCAI-93, R. Bajcsy, ed. pp. 584–589. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA, 193.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2001 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Engelfriet, J., Treur, J. (2001). An Interpretation of Default Logic in Minimal Temporal Epistemic Logic. In: Meyer, JJ.C., Treur, J. (eds) Dynamics and Management of Reasoning Processes. Handbook of Defeasible Reasoning and Uncertainty Management Systems, vol 6. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-1743-4_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-1743-4_7
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-5903-1
Online ISBN: 978-94-017-1743-4
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive