scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
JournalISSN: 1166-3081

Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics 

Taylor & Francis
About: Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics is an academic journal published by Taylor & Francis. The journal publishes majorly in the area(s): Modal logic & T-norm fuzzy logics. It has an ISSN identifier of 1166-3081. Over the lifetime, 488 publications have been published receiving 8442 citations. The journal is also known as: Journal of applied nonclassical logics & JANCL.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A semantics and proof theory of a system for defeasible argumentation in a logic-programming language with both weak and strong negation, where an argument is shown to be justified if the proponent can make the opponent run out of moves in whatever way the opponent attacks.
Abstract: Inspired by legal reasoning, this paper presents a semantics and proof theory of a system for defeasible argumentation. Arguments are expressed in a logic-programming language with both weak and strong negation, conflicts between arguments are decided with the help of priorities on the rules. An important feature of the system is that these priorities are not fixed, but are themselves defeasibly derived as conclusions within the system. Thus debates on the choice between conflicting arguments can also be modelled. The semantics of the system is given with a fixpoint definition, while its proof theory is stated in dialectical style, where a proof takes the form of a dialogue between a proponent and an opponent of an argument: an argument is shown to be justified if the proponent can make the opponent run out of moves in whatever way the opponent attacks.

676 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This work shows how belief revision can be treated systematically in the format of dynamicepistemic logic, when operators of conditional belief are added, and obtains complete logics for concrete mechanisms of belief revision based on compositional reduction axioms.
Abstract: We show how belief revision can be treated systematically in the format of dynamicepistemic logic, when operators of conditional belief are added. The core engine consists of definable update rules for changing plausibility relations between worlds, which have been proposed independently in the dynamic-epistemic literature on preference change. Our analysis yields two new types of modal result. First, we obtain complete logics for concrete mechanisms of belief revision, based on compositional reduction axioms. Next, we show how various abstract postulates for belief revision can be analyzed by standard modal frame correspondences for model-changing operations.

408 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A type of planning domain called epistemic planning domains is defined, a generalisation of classical planning domains, and it is shown how Epistemic planning can successfully deal with partial observability, nondeterminism, knowledge and multiple agents.
Abstract: In this paper, we investigate the use of event models for automated planning. Event models are the action defining structures used to define a semantics for dynamic epistemic logic. Using event models, two issues in planning can be addressed: Partial observability of the environment and knowledge. In planning, partial observability gives rise to an uncertainty about the world. For single-agent domains, this uncertainty can come from incomplete knowledge of the starting situation and from the nondeterminism of actions. In multi-agent domains, an additional uncertainty arises from the fact that other agents can act in the world, causing changes that are not instigated by the agent itself. For an agent to successfully construct and execute plans in an uncertain environment, the most widely used formalism in the literature on automated planning is “belief states”: sets of different alternatives for the current state of the world. Epistemic logic is a significantly more expressive and theoretically better foun...

238 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This paper addresses the problem of counting the models of a propositional theory under incremental changes to its literals, and shows that smooth, deterministic, decomposable negation normal form (sd-DNNF) is a strictly more space efficient representation than Free Binary Decision Diagrams.
Abstract: We address in this paper the problem of counting the models of a propositional theory under incremental changes to its literals. Specifcally, we show that if a propositional theory Δ is in a special form that we call smooth, deterministic, decomposable negation normal form (sd-DNNF), then for any consistent set of literals S, we can simultaneously count (in time linear in the size of Δ) the models of Δ ∪ S and the models of every theory Δ ∪ T where T results from adding, removing or flipping a literal in S. We present two results relating to the time and space complexity of compiling propositional theories into sd-DNNF. First, we show that if a conjunctive normal form (CNF) has a bounded treewidth, then it can be compiled into an sd-DNNF in time and space which are linear in its size. Second, we show that sd-DNNF is a strictly more space efficient representation than Free Binary Decision Diagrams (FBDDs). Finally, we discuss some applications of the counting results to truth maintenance systems, belief re...

217 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A complete logic of knowledge update plus preference upgrade that works with dynamic-epistemic-style reduction axioms that can model changing obligations, conflicting commands, or ‘regret' and is concluded that the dynamic framework is viable, while admitting a further extension to more numerical ‘utility update'.
Abstract: Statements not only update our current knowledge, but also have other dynamic effects. In particular, suggestions or commands ‘upgrade' our preferences by changing the current order among worlds. We present a complete logic of knowledge update plus preference upgrade that works with dynamic-epistemic-style reduction axioms. This system can model changing obligations, conflicting commands, or ‘regret'. We then show how to derive reduction axioms from arbitrary definable relation changes. This style of analysis also has a product update version with preferences between actions, as well as worlds. Some illustrations are presented involving defaults and obligations. We conclude that our dynamic framework is viable, while admitting a further extension to more numerical ‘utility update'.

213 citations

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Journal in previous years
YearPapers
20232
202213
202111
202012
201917
201817