The approach to database query evaluation developed by Levesque and Reiter treats databases as first order theories, and queries as formulas of the language which includes, in addition to the language of the database, an epistemic modal operator. In this epistemic query language, one can express questions not only about the external world described by the database, but also about the database itself-- about what the database knows. On the other hand, epistemic formulas are used in knowledge representation for the purpose of expressing defaults. Autoepistemic logic is the best known epistemic nonmonotonic formalism; the logic of grounded knowledge, proposed recently by Lin and Shoham, is another such system. This paper brings these two directions of research together. We describe a new version of the Lin/Shoham logic, similar in spirit to the Levesque/Reiter theory of epistemic queries. Using this formalism, we can give meaning to epistemic queries in the context of nonmonotonic databases, including logic programs with negation as failure.

background

/pdf/nonmonotonic-databases-and-epistemic-queries-50v7e955v8.pdf

Logic programs with classical negation

Nonmonotonic databases and epistemic queries

This collection represents the primary reference work for researchers and students in the area of Temporal Reasoning in Artificial Intelligence Temporal reasoning has a vital role to play in many areas, particularly Artificial Intelligence Yet, until now, there has been no single volume collecting together the breadth of work in this area This collection brings together the leading researchers in a range of relevant areas and provides an coherent description of the breadth of activity concerning temporal reasoning in the filed of Artificial Intelligence

Key Features:

- Broad range: foundations; techniques and applications
- Leading researchers around the world have written the chapters
- Covers many vital applications
- Source book for Artificial Intelligence, temporal reasoning
- Approaches provide foundation for many future software systems

·Broad range: foundations; techniques and applications
·Leading researchers around the world have written the chapters
·Covers many vital applications
·Source book for Artificial Intelligence, temporal reasoning
·Approaches provide foundation for many future software systems

Table of Contents

"Formal Theories of Time and Temproal Incidence", Lluis Vila 

"Eventualities", Antony Galton 

"Time Granularity", Jerome Euzenat and Angelo Montanari 

"Modal Varieties of Temporal Logic", Howard Barringer and Dov Gabbay 

"Temporal Qualification in Artificial Intelligence", Han Reichgelt and Lluis Vila 

"Computational Complexity of Temporal Constraint Problems", Thomas Drakengren and Peter Jonsson 

"Indefinite Constraint Databases with Temporal Information: Representational Power and Computational Complexity", Manolis Koubarakis 

"Processing Qualitative Temporal Constraints", Alfonso Gerevini 

"Theorem-Proving for Discrete Temporal Logic", Mark Reynolds/Clare Dixon 

"Probabilistic Temporal Reasoning", Steve Hanks/David Madigan 

"Temporal Reasoning with iff-Abduction", Marc Denecker/Kristof Van Belleghem 

"Temporal Description Logics", Alessandro Artale/Enrico Franconi 

"Logic Programming and Reasoning about Actions", Chitta Baral/Michael Gelfond 

"Temporal Databases" Jan Chomicki/David Toman 

"Temporal Reasoning in Agent-Based Systems" Michael Fisher/Michael Wooldridge 

"Time in Planning" Maris Fox/Derek Long 

"Time in Automated Legal Reasoning" Lluis Vila/Hajime Yoshino 

"Temporal Reasoning in Natural Language" Alice ter Meulen 

"Temporal Reasoning in Medicine" Elpida Keravnou/Yuval Shahar 

"Time in Qualitative Simulation" Dan Clancy/Benjamin Kuipers

Handbook of Temporal Reasoning in Artificial Intelligence

In this paper we explore the thesis that the role of argumentation in practical reasoning in general and legal reasoning in particular is to justify the use of defeasible rules to derive a conclusion in preference to the use of other defeasible rules to derive a conflicting conclusion. The defeasibility of rules is expressed by means of non-provability claims as additional conditions of the rules.

We outline an abstract approach to defeasible reasoning and argumentation which includes many existing formalisms, including default logic, extended logic programming, non-monotonic modal logic and auto-epistemic logic, as special cases. We show, in particular, that the `admissibility' semantics for all these formalisms has a natural argumentation-theoretic interpretation and proof procedure, which seem to correspond well with informal argumentation.

In the admissibility semantics there is only one way for one argument to attack another, namely by undermining one of its non-provability claims. In this paper, we show how other kinds of attack between arguments, specifically how rebuttal and priority attacks, can be reduced to the undermining of non-provability claims.

Abstract argumentation

Normal logic programs.- Extended logic programs.- Why a new semantics for extended programs?.- WFSX - A well founded semantics for extended logic programs.- WFSX, LP semantics with two negations, and autoepistemic logics.- WFSX and default logic.- WFSX and hypotheses abduction.- Dealing with contradiction.- Further properties and comparisons.- Top-down derivation procedures for WFSX.- Application to classical nonmonotonic reasoning problems.- Application to diagnosis and debugging.

background or methods

Reasoning with Logic Programming

We extend logic programming to deal with default reasoning by allowing the explicit representation of exceptions in addition to general rules. To formalise this extension, we modify the answer set semantics of Gelfond and Lifschitz, which allows both classical negation and negation as failure. We also propose a transformation which eliminates exceptions by using negation by failure. The transformed program can be implemented by standard logic programming methods, such as SLDNF. The explicit representation of rules and exceptions has the virtue of greater naturalness of expression. The transformed program, however, is easier to implement.

Logic programs with classical negation

Citations

Nonmonotonic databases and epistemic queries

Handbook of Temporal Reasoning in Artificial Intelligence

Abstract argumentation

Reasoning with Logic Programming

Logic programs with exceptions

Related Papers (5)

The stable model semantics for logic programming

The well-founded semantics for general logic programs

A logic for default reasoning

Classical negation in logic programs and disjunctive databases

Negation as failure