Advertisement

Towards a formalization of narratives: Actions with duration, concurrent actions and qualifications

  • Anna Radzikowska
Accepted Papers
  • 102 Downloads
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1244)

Abstract

The paper addresses the qualification problem in the context of narratives where actions with duration, causal chains of actions and concurrent actions occur. In order to represent these scenarios, we define an action description language AL1 which enables to represent different types of system constraints and guarantees correct interactions between actions in simple cases of concurrency. A simple linear discrete model of time is assumed. Two preferential methods of reasoning are proposed which amount to global and chronological maximization of executable actions, respectively. We provide a translation from AL1 into circumscription and show that this translation is sound and complete relative to the semantics of AL1.

Keywords

State Constraint Mutual Exclusion Concurrent Action Action Scenario Domain Description 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    C. Baral, M. Gelfond: Representing Concurrent Actions in Extended Logic Programming, in Proc IJCAI-93, Chambery, 1993, pp. 866–871.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    M. Gelfond, V. Lifschitz: Representing Action and Change by Logic Programs, in The Journal of Logic Programming, (17), 1993, pp. 301–322.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    A. Kakas, R. Miller: A Simple Declarative Language for Describing Narratives with Actions, Imperial College Research Report No DoC95/12, 1995; also in Journal of Logic Programming (Special Issue on Reasoning about Action and Change).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    V. Lifschitz: Pointwise Circumscription, in M. Ginsberg, editor, Readings in Nonmonotonic Reasoning, pp. 179–193, Morgan Kaufmann, 1988.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    F. Lin, R. Reiter: State constraints revisited, in Journal of Logic and Computation (Special Issue on Actions and Processes), 4(5), 1994, pp. 655–678.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    R. Miller, M. Shanahan: Narratives in the Situation Calculus, in Journal of Logic and Computation, Special Issue on Actions and Processes, vol. 4, No 5, 1995.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    A. Radzikowska: Reasoning about Action with Typical and Atypical Effects, in Proc. of 19th KI-95, Bielefeld, 1995, pp. 197–209.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    A. Radzikowska: Formalization of Reasoning about Default Action (Preliminary Report), in Proc. of FAPR-96, Bonn, 1996, pp. 540–554.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    R. Reiter: Natural Actions, Concurrency and Continuous Time in the Situation Calculus, in Proc. of KR-96, Boston, MA, 1996.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    E. Sandewall, R. Röonquist: A representation of action structures, in Proc. of AAAI-86, pp. 89–97.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    E. Sandewall: Features and Fluents: A systematic approach to the representation of knowledge about dynamical systems, Oxford University Press, 1994.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    E. Sandewall: Comparative Assessment of Update Methods Using Static Domain Constraints, in Proc. of KR-96, Boston, MA, 1996.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    S. E. Bornscheuer, M. Thielscher: Representing Concurrent Actions and Solving Conflicts, in Proc. of 18th KI-94, Saarbrücken, 1994, pp. 16–27.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anna Radzikowska
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of MathematicsWarsaw University of TechnologyWarsawPoland

Personalised recommendations