Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Dynamic Knowledge Representation and Its Applications

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Artificial Intelligence: Methodology, Systems, and Applications (AIMSA 2000)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 1904))

  • 339 Accesses

Abstract

This paper has two main objectives. One is to show that the dynamic knowledge representation paradigm introduced in [ALP+00] and the associated language LUPS, defined in [APPP 99], constitute na- tural, powerful and expressive tools for representing dynamically changing knowledge. We do so by demonstrating the applicability of the dynamic knowledge representation paradigm and the language LUPS to several broad knowledge representation domains, for each of which we provide an illustrative example.

Our second objective is to extend our approach to allow proper handling of conflicting updates. So far, our research on knowledge updates was restricted to a two-valued semantics, which, in the presence of conflict- ing updates, leads to an inconsistent update, even though the updated knowledge base does not necessarily contain any truly contradictory in- formation. By extending our approach to the three-valued semantics we gain the added expressiveness allowing us to express undefined or non- committal updates.

This work was partially supported by PRAXIS XXI project MENTAL, and a NATO scholarship while L. M. Pereira was on leave at the Department of Computer Science, University of California, Riverside. We thank João Leite for helpful discussions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. José J. Alferes, João A. Leite, Luís M. Pereira, Halina Przymusinska, and Teodor C. Przymusinski. Dynamic updates of non-monotonic knowledge bases. Journal of Logic Programming, page (to appear), 2000. Extended abstract appeared in KR’98, pages 98–111. Morgan Kaufmann, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  2. José J. Alferes, Luýs M. Pereira, Halina Przymusinska, and Teodor C. Przymusinski. LUPS-a language for updating logic programs. In LPNMR’99, Lecture Notes in AI 1730, pages 162–176. Springer, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  3. C. V. Damásio and Luís M. Pereira. Default negated conclusions: why not? In R. Dyckhoff, H. Herre, and P. Schroeder-Heister, (editors), Int. Workshop on Extensions of Logic Programming (EL’96), number 1050 in LNAI, pages 103–117, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Abdel Ali Ed-Dbali and Pierre Deransart. Software formal specification by logic programming: The example of standard PROLOG. Research report, INRIA, Paris, France, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Gerard Ferrand and Pierre Deransart. Proof method of partial correctness and weak completeness for normal logic programs. Research report, INRIA, Paris, France, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  6. M. Gelfond and V. Lifschitz. The stable model semantics for logic programming. In R. Kowalski and K. A. Bowen, (editors), ICLP’88. MIT Press, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Michael Gelfond and Vladimir Lifschitz. Representing Actions and Change by Logic Programs. Journal of Logic Programming, 17:301–322, 1993.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. M. Gelfond and V. Lifschitz. Action languages. Linkoping Electronic Articles in Computer and Information Science, 3(16), 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  9. E. Giunchiglia and V. Lifschitz. An action language based on causal explanation: Preliminary report. In Proceedings AAAI-98, pages 623–630, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  10. R. Kowalski. Legislation as logic programs. In Logic Programming in Action, pages 203–230. Springer-Verlag, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  11. F. Lin. Embracing causality in specifying the indirect effects of actions. In IJCAI’95, pages 1985–1991. Morgan Kaufmann, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  12. K. K. Lau and M. Ornaghi. The relationship between logic programs and specifications. Journal of Logic Programming, 30(3):239–257, 1997.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. Lifschitz and Woo. Answer sets in general non-monotonic reasoning preliminary report. In B. Nebel, C. Rich, and W. Swartout, (editors), KR’92. Morgan-Kaufmann, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centro de Inteligência Artificial, Fac. Ciências e Tecnologia, Univ. Nova de Lisboa, P-2825-114, Caparica, Portugal

    José Júlio Alferes, Luýs Moniz Pereira & Paulo Quaresma

  2. Dept. de Informática, Univ. Évora, Rua Romão Ramalho, 59, P-7000, Evora, Portugal

    Paulo Quaresma

  3. Department of Computer Science, California State Polytechnic University, Pomona, CA, 91768, USA

    Halina Przymusinska

  4. Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University of California, Riverside, CA, 92521, USA

    Teodor C. Przymusinski

Authors
  1. José Júlio Alferes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Luýs Moniz Pereira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Halina Przymusinska
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Teodor C. Przymusinski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Paulo Quaresma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2000 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Alferes, J.J., Pereira, L.M., Przymusinska, H., Przymusinski, T.C., Quaresma, P. (2000). Dynamic Knowledge Representation and Its Applications. In: Artificial Intelligence: Methodology, Systems, and Applications. AIMSA 2000. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1904. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45331-8_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45331-8_1

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-41044-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-45331-4

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics