Advertisement

Probabilistic default logic based on irrelevance and relevance assumptions

  • Gerhard Schurz
Accepted Papers
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1244)

Abstract

This paper embeds default logic into an extension of Adams' probability logic, called the system P + DP. Default reasoning is furnished with two mechanisms: one generates (ir)relevance assumptions, and the other propagates lower probability bounds. Together both mechanisms make default reasoning probabilistically reliable. There is an exact correspondence between Poole-extensions and P + DP-extensions. The procedure for P + DP-entailment is comparable in complexity with Poole's procedure.

Keywords

Probabilistic Default Default Logic Default Reasoning Open Formula Inference Step 
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.
    E. W. Adams. The Logic of Conditionals. Reidel, Dordrecht, 1975.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    E. W. Adams. On the logic of high probability. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 15:255–279, 1986.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    F. Bacchus. Representing and Reasoning with Probabilistic Knowledge. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1990.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    G. Brewka. Nonmonotonic Reasoning. The Logic of Commonsense. Cambridge University Press, 1991.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    R. Carnap. Logical Foundations of Probability. University of Chicago Press, second edition, 1962.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    J.P. Delgrande. An approach to default reaoning based on a first-order conditional logic: revised report. Artificial Intelligence, 36:63–90, 1988.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    A.M. Frisch and P. Haddawy. Anytime deduction for probabilistic logic. Artificial Intelligence, 69:93–122, 1994.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    H. Geffner and J. Pearl. A framework for reasoning with defaults. In H.E. Kyburg et al., editors, Knowledge Representation and Defeasible Reasoning, pages 69–87. Kluwer, The Netherlands, 1990.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    M. Goldszmidt and J. Pearl. Qualitative probabilities for default reasoning, belief revision and causal modeling. Artificial Intelligence, 84:57–112, 1996.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    D. Lehmann and M. Magidor. What does a conditional knowledge base entail? Artificial Intelligence, 55:1–60, 1992.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    A. Y. Levy and Y. Sagiv. Exploiting irrelevance reasoning to guide problem solving. In Proceedings IJCAI-93, pages 138–144, Santa Mateo, 1993.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    J. Pearl. Fusion, propagation, and structuring in belief networks. Artificial Intelligence, 29:241–288, 1986.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    J. Pearl. Probabilistic Reasoning in Intelligent Systems: Networks of Plausible Inference. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA, 1988.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    D. Poole. A logical framework for default reasoning. Artificial Intelligence, 36:27–47, 1988.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    D. Poole. Compiling a default reasoning system into prolog. New Generation Computing, 9:3–38, 1991.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    R. Reiter. A logic for default reasoning. Artificial Intelligence, 13:81–132, 1980.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    G. Schurz. Probabilistic justification of default reasoning. In B. Nebel and L. Dreschler-Fischer, editors, KI-94: Advances in Artificial Intelligence, pages 248–259. Springer, Berlin, 1994.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    G. Schurz. Research note: an examination of Delgrande's conditional default logic. IPS preprints 1/97, University of Salzburg, 1997.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gerhard Schurz
    • 1
  1. 1.Inst. f. Philosophie, Abtlg. Logik und WissenschaftstheorieUniversität SalzburgDeutschland

Personalised recommendations