452 research outputs found
Defeasible Logic Programming: An Argumentative Approach
The work reported here introduces Defeasible Logic Programming (DeLP), a
formalism that combines results of Logic Programming and Defeasible
Argumentation. DeLP provides the possibility of representing information in the
form of weak rules in a declarative manner, and a defeasible argumentation
inference mechanism for warranting the entailed conclusions.
In DeLP an argumentation formalism will be used for deciding between
contradictory goals. Queries will be supported by arguments that could be
defeated by other arguments. A query q will succeed when there is an argument A
for q that is warranted, ie, the argument A that supports q is found undefeated
by a warrant procedure that implements a dialectical analysis.
The defeasible argumentation basis of DeLP allows to build applications that
deal with incomplete and contradictory information in dynamic domains. Thus,
the resulting approach is suitable for representing agent's knowledge and for
providing an argumentation based reasoning mechanism to agents.Comment: 43 pages, to appear in the journal "Theory and Practice of Logic
Programming
Probabilistic Default Reasoning with Conditional Constraints
We propose a combination of probabilistic reasoning from conditional
constraints with approaches to default reasoning from conditional knowledge
bases. In detail, we generalize the notions of Pearl's entailment in system Z,
Lehmann's lexicographic entailment, and Geffner's conditional entailment to
conditional constraints. We give some examples that show that the new notions
of z-, lexicographic, and conditional entailment have similar properties like
their classical counterparts. Moreover, we show that the new notions of z-,
lexicographic, and conditional entailment are proper generalizations of both
their classical counterparts and the classical notion of logical entailment for
conditional constraints.Comment: 8 pages; to appear in Proceedings of the Eighth International
Workshop on Nonmonotonic Reasoning, Special Session on Uncertainty Frameworks
in Nonmonotonic Reasoning, Breckenridge, Colorado, USA, 9-11 April 200
John L. Pollock\u27s theory of rationality
Pollock is developing, and testing computationally a theory of rationality. I endorse his claim that the structure of argument is not always linear, his replacement of the deductive-inductive distinction with a deductive-defeasible distinction, and hi s distinction between rebutting defeaters, and undercutting defeaters. I question the absence of pragmatic constraints in his acceptance rule, an absence which fits ill with his criterion of interruptibility, that it is reasonable to act on the conclusions drawn at any point. I also wonder about building a model of a rational agent in which there is no place for interpersonal argumentative discussion
Defeasible-argumentation-based multi-agent planning
[EN] This paper presents a planning system that uses defeasible argumentation to reason about
context information during the construction of a plan. The system is designed to operate
in cooperative multi-agent environments where agents are endowed with planning and
argumentation capabilities. Planning allows agents to contribute with actions to the construction
of the plan, and argumentation is the mechanism that agents use to defend or
attack the planning choices according to their beliefs. We present the formalization of the
model and we provide a novel specification of the qualification problem. The multi-agent
planning system, which is designed to be domain-independent, is evaluated with two planning
tasks from the problem suites of the International Planning Competition. We compare
our system with a non-argumentative planning framework and with a different approach
of planning and argumentation. The results will show that our system obtains less costly
and more robust solution plans.This work has been partly supported by the Spanish MINECO under project TIN2014-55637-C2-2-R and the Valencian project PROMETEO II/2013/019.Pajares Ferrando, S.; Onaindia De La Rivaherrera, E. (2017). Defeasible-argumentation-based multi-agent planning. Information Sciences. 411:1-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2017.05.014S12241
Logical properties in defeasible logic programming -a preliminary report
Logics for nonmonotonic reasoning have often been described by the property they lack-that is, monotonicity-instead of by those they do enjoy. These theories flourished in the early `80s in response to the inconveniences incomplete and changing information posed to classic, monotonic approaches. Several nonmonotonic formalisms were introduced in the literature: inheritance networks, default logic, preferential entailment, autoepistemic logic, and defeasible argumentation among others. The introduction of these proposals in a short span of time made it difficult to decide which approach is best suited for a given context.Eje: Aspectos teóricos de inteligencia artificialRed de Universidades con Carreras en Informática (RedUNCI
- …