1,458 research outputs found
Interdefinability of defeasible logic and logic programming under the well-founded semantics
We provide a method of translating theories of Nute's defeasible logic into
logic programs, and a corresponding translation in the opposite direction.
Under certain natural restrictions, the conclusions of defeasible theories
under the ambiguity propagating defeasible logic ADL correspond to those of the
well-founded semantics for normal logic programs, and so it turns out that the
two formalisms are closely related. Using the same translation of logic
programs into defeasible theories, the semantics for the ambiguity blocking
defeasible logic NDL can be seen as indirectly providing an ambiguity blocking
semantics for logic programs. We also provide antimonotone operators for both
ADL and NDL, each based on the Gelfond-Lifschitz (GL) operator for logic
programs. For defeasible theories without defeaters or priorities on rules, the
operator for ADL corresponds to the GL operator and so can be seen as partially
capturing the consequences according to ADL. Similarly, the operator for NDL
captures the consequences according to NDL, though in this case no restrictions
on theories apply. Both operators can be used to define stable model semantics
for defeasible theories.Comment: 36 pages; To appear in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming
(TPLP
Knowledge Representation Concepts for Automated SLA Management
Outsourcing of complex IT infrastructure to IT service providers has
increased substantially during the past years. IT service providers must be
able to fulfil their service-quality commitments based upon predefined Service
Level Agreements (SLAs) with the service customer. They need to manage, execute
and maintain thousands of SLAs for different customers and different types of
services, which needs new levels of flexibility and automation not available
with the current technology. The complexity of contractual logic in SLAs
requires new forms of knowledge representation to automatically draw inferences
and execute contractual agreements. A logic-based approach provides several
advantages including automated rule chaining allowing for compact knowledge
representation as well as flexibility to adapt to rapidly changing business
requirements. We suggest adequate logical formalisms for representation and
enforcement of SLA rules and describe a proof-of-concept implementation. The
article describes selected formalisms of the ContractLog KR and their adequacy
for automated SLA management and presents results of experiments to demonstrate
flexibility and scalability of the approach.Comment: Paschke, A. and Bichler, M.: Knowledge Representation Concepts for
Automated SLA Management, Int. Journal of Decision Support Systems (DSS),
submitted 19th March 200
A flexible framework for defeasible logics
Logics for knowledge representation suffer from over-specialization: while
each logic may provide an ideal representation formalism for some problems, it
is less than optimal for others. A solution to this problem is to choose from
several logics and, when necessary, combine the representations. In general,
such an approach results in a very difficult problem of combination. However,
if we can choose the logics from a uniform framework then the problem of
combining them is greatly simplified. In this paper, we develop such a
framework for defeasible logics. It supports all defeasible logics that satisfy
a strong negation principle. We use logic meta-programs as the basis for the
framework.Comment: Proceedings of 8th International Workshop on Non-Monotonic Reasoning,
April 9-11, 2000, Breckenridge, Colorad
A Parameterised Hierarchy of Argumentation Semantics for Extended Logic Programming and its Application to the Well-founded Semantics
Argumentation has proved a useful tool in defining formal semantics for
assumption-based reasoning by viewing a proof as a process in which proponents
and opponents attack each others arguments by undercuts (attack to an
argument's premise) and rebuts (attack to an argument's conclusion). In this
paper, we formulate a variety of notions of attack for extended logic programs
from combinations of undercuts and rebuts and define a general hierarchy of
argumentation semantics parameterised by the notions of attack chosen by
proponent and opponent. We prove the equivalence and subset relationships
between the semantics and examine some essential properties concerning
consistency and the coherence principle, which relates default negation and
explicit negation. Most significantly, we place existing semantics put forward
in the literature in our hierarchy and identify a particular argumentation
semantics for which we prove equivalence to the paraconsistent well-founded
semantics with explicit negation, WFSX. Finally, we present a general proof
theory, based on dialogue trees, and show that it is sound and complete with
respect to the argumentation semantics.Comment: To appear in Theory and Practice of Logic Programmin
Reasoning about exceptions in ontologies: from the lexicographic closure to the skeptical closure
Reasoning about exceptions in ontologies is nowadays one of the challenges
the description logics community is facing. The paper describes a preferential
approach for dealing with exceptions in Description Logics, based on the
rational closure. The rational closure has the merit of providing a simple and
efficient approach for reasoning with exceptions, but it does not allow
independent handling of the inheritance of different defeasible properties of
concepts. In this work we outline a possible solution to this problem by
introducing a variant of the lexicographical closure, that we call skeptical
closure, which requires to construct a single base. We develop a bi-preference
semantics semantics for defining a characterization of the skeptical closure
Defeasible Reasoning in SROEL: from Rational Entailment to Rational Closure
In this work we study a rational extension of the low complexity
description logic SROEL, which underlies the OWL EL ontology language. The
extension involves a typicality operator T, whose semantics is based on Lehmann
and Magidor's ranked models and allows for the definition of defeasible
inclusions. We consider both rational entailment and minimal entailment. We
show that deciding instance checking under minimal entailment is in general
-hard, while, under rational entailment, instance checking can be
computed in polynomial time. We develop a Datalog calculus for instance
checking under rational entailment and exploit it, with stratified negation,
for computing the rational closure of simple KBs in polynomial time.Comment: Accepted for publication on Fundamenta Informatica
- …