Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

International Workshop on Non-Monotonic Reasoning

NMR 1988: Non-Monotonic Reasoning pp 42–59Cite as

Hierarchic autoepistemic theories for nonmonotonic reasoning: Preliminary report

  • Autoepistemic Logics
  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 346))

Abstract

Nonmonotonic logics are meant to be a formalization of nonmonotonic reasoning. However, for the most part they fail to embody two of the most important aspects of such reasoning: the explicit computational nature of nonmonotonic inference, and the assignment of preferences among competing inferences. We propose a method of nonmonotonic reasoning in which the notion of inference from specific bodies of evidence plays a fundamental role. The formalization is based on autoepistemic logic, but introduces additional structure, a hierarchy of evidential spaces. The method offers a natural formalization of many different applications of nonmonotonic reasoning, including reasoning about action, speech acts, belief revision, and various situations involving competing defaults.

This research was supported by the Office of Naval Research Contract N00014-85-C-0251, by subcontract from Stanford University under Defense Advanced Research Projects Administration Contract N00039-84-C-0211, and by a gift from the System Development Foundation.

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

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Appelt, D. E. and K. Konolige. 1988. A nonmonotonic logic for reasoning about speech acts and belief revision. Second Workshop on Non-Monotonic Reasoning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Etherington, D. W. and R. Reiter. 1983. On inheritance hierarchies with exceptions. In Proceedings of the American Association of Artificial Intelligence.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geissler, C. and K. Konolige. 1986. A resolution method for quantified modal logics of knowledge and belief. In Halpern, J. Y., editor, Conference on Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning about Knowledge, pages 309–324, Morgan Kaufmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanks, S. and D. McDermott. 1987. Nonmonotonic logic and temporal projection. Artificial Intelligence, 33(3).

    Google Scholar 

  • Konolige, K. 1987. On the relation between default logic and autoepistemic theories. Artificial Intelligence, 35(3):343–382.

    Google Scholar 

  • Konolige, K. and K. Myers. 1987. Representing defaults with epistemic concepts. Forthcoming technical note.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levesque, H. J. 1982. A Formal Treatment of Incomplete Knowledge Bases. Technical Report 614, Fairchild Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, Palo Alto, California.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levesque, H. J. 1987. All I know: an abridged report. In Proceedings of the American Association of Artificial Intelligence, Seattle, Washington.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lifschitz, V. 1984. Some results on circumscription. In AAAI Workshop on Non-Monotonic Reasoning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loui, R. P. 1987. Defeat among arguments: a system of defeasible inference. Computational Intelligence, 3(2).

    Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy, J. 1980. Circumscription—a form of nonmonotonic reasoning. Artificial Intelligence, 13(1–2).

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, R. C. 1984. Possible-world Semantics for Autoepistemic Logic. Technical Note 337, SRI Artificial Intelligence Center, Menlo Park, California.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, R. C. 1985. Semantical considerations on nonmonotonic logic. Artificial Intelligence, 25(1).

    Google Scholar 

  • Poole, D. 1985. On the comparison of theories: preferring the most specific explanation. In Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 144–147, Los Angeles.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reiter, R. 1980. A logic for default reasoning. Artificial Intelligence, 13(1–2).

    Google Scholar 

  • Reiter, R. and G. Criscuolo. 1983. Some representational issues in default reasoning. In Cercone, N. J., editor, Computational Linguistics, pages 15–27, Pergamon Press, Elmsford, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shoham, Y. 1987. Reasoning about Change: Time and Causation from the Standpoint of Artificial Intelligence. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetss.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stalnaker, R. C. 1980. A note on nonmonotonic modal logic. Department of Philosophy, Cornell University.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for the Study of Language and Information, Artificial Intelligence Center, SRI International, 94025, Menlo Park, California

    Kurt Konolige

Authors
  1. Kurt Konolige
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

M. Reinfrank J. de Kleer M. L. Ginsberg E. Sandewall

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1988 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Konolige, K. (1988). Hierarchic autoepistemic theories for nonmonotonic reasoning: Preliminary report. In: Reinfrank, M., de Kleer, J., Ginsberg, M.L., Sandewall, E. (eds) Non-Monotonic Reasoning. NMR 1988. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 346. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-50701-9_19

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-50701-9_19

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-50701-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-46073-2

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation