Nonmonotonic logic and temporal projection
Artificial Intelligence
A skeptical theory of inheritance in nonmonotonic semantic networks
Artificial Intelligence
An abstract, argumentation-theoretic approach to default reasoning
Artificial Intelligence
Solving the frame problem: a mathematical investigation of the common sense law of inertia
Solving the frame problem: a mathematical investigation of the common sense law of inertia
The Qualification Problem: A solution to the problem of anomalous models
Artificial Intelligence
An Argumentation Framework of Reasoning about Actions and Change
LPNMR '99 Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning
Proceedings of the 2008 conference on ECAI 2008: 18th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence
Embracing causality in specifying the indirect effects of actions
IJCAI'95 Proceedings of the 14th international joint conference on Artificial intelligence - Volume 2
Modular-ε: an elaboration tolerant approach to the ramification and qualification problems
LPNMR'05 Proceedings of the 8th international conference on Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning
Hi-index | 0.00 |
We propose a framework that brings together two major forms of default reasoning in Artificial Intelligence: default property classification in static domains, and default property persistence in temporal domains. Emphasis in this work is placed on the qualification problem , central when dealing with default reasoning, and in any attempt to integrate different forms of such reasoning. Our framework can be viewed as offering a semantics to two natural problems: (i) that of employing default static knowledge in a temporal setting, and (ii) the dual one of temporally projecting and dynamically updating default static knowledge. The proposed integration is introduced through a series of example domains, and is then formalized through argumentation. The semantics follows a pragmatic approach. At each time-point, an agent predicts the next state of affairs. As long as this is consistent with the available observations, the agent continues to reason forward. In case some of the observations cannot be explained without appealing to some exogenous reason, the agent revisits and revises its past assumptions. We conclude with some formal results, including an algorithm for computing complete admissible argument sets, and a proof of elaboration tolerance , in the sense that additional knowledge can be gracefully accommodated in any domain.