Reasoning about change: time and causation from the standpoint of artificial intelligence
Reasoning about change: time and causation from the standpoint of artificial intelligence
A semantical approach to nonmonotonic logics
Readings in nonmonotonic reasoning
Cumulative default logic: in defense of nonmonotonic inference rules
Artificial Intelligence
On constrained default theories
ECAI '92 Proceedings of the 10th European conference on Artificial intelligence
Default theories that always have extensions
Artificial Intelligence
Artificial Intelligence
Alternative foundations for Reiter's default logic
Artificial Intelligence
Nonmonotonic Logic: Context-Dependent Reasoning
Nonmonotonic Logic: Context-Dependent Reasoning
Signed Systems for Paraconsistent Reasoning
Journal of Automated Reasoning
Reasoning with Stratified Default Theories
LPNMR '95 Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning
CSL '91 Proceedings of the 5th Workshop on Computer Science Logic
ISMVL '95 Proceedings of the 25th International Symposium on Multiple-Valued Logic
A tableau algorithm for paraconsistent and nonmonotonic reasoning in description logic-based system
APWeb'11 Proceedings of the 13th Asia-Pacific web conference on Web technologies and applications
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
Reiter's default logic can not handle inconsistencies and incoherences and thus is not satisfactory enough in commonsense reasoning. In the paper we propose a new variant of default logic named FDL in which the existence of extension is guaranteed and the trivial extension is avoided. Moreover, Reiter's default extensions are reserved and can be identified from the other extensions in FDL. Technically, we develop a paraconsistent and monotonic reasoning system based on resolution as the underlying logic of FDL. The definition of extension is also modified in the manner that conflicts between justifications of the used defaults and the conclusions of the extension, which we call justification conflicts, are permitted, so that justifications can not be denied by “subsequent” defaults and the existence of extension is guaranteed. Then we select the desired extensions as preferred ones according to the criteria that justification conflicts should be minimal.