A comparison of two approaches to splitting default theories

Authors:
Grigoris Antoniou
Affiliations:
Griffith University, CIT, Nathan, Australia
Venue:
AAAI'97/IAAI'97 Proceedings of the fourteenth national conference on artificial intelligence and ninth conference on Innovative applications of artificial intelligence
Year:
1997

Citing 7
Cited 0

Splitting a logic program

Proceedings of the eleventh international conference on Logic programming
Alternative approaches to default logic

Artificial Intelligence
Reasoning with Stratified Default Theories

LPNMR '95 Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning
Stratified Default Theories

CSL '94 Selected Papers from the 8th International Workshop on Computer Science Logic
Constrained and rational default logics

IJCAI'95 Proceedings of the 14th international joint conference on Artificial intelligence - Volume 2
Toward efficient default reasoning

AAAI'96 Proceedings of the thirteenth national conference on Artificial intelligence - Volume 1
Splitting a default theory

AAAI'96 Proceedings of the thirteenth national conference on Artificial intelligence - Volume 1

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.00

Visualization

Abstract

Default logic is computationally expensive. One of the most promising ways of easing this problem and developing powerful implementations is to split a default theory into smaller parts and compute extensions in a modular, "local" way. This paper compares two recent approaches, Turner's splitting and Cholewinski's stratification. It shows that the approaches are closely related - in fact the former can be viewed as a special case of the latter.