Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Only persistence makes nonmonotonicity monotonous

Extended abstract

  • Nonmonotonic Reasoning
  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Logics in Artificial Intelligence (JELIA 1996)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 1126))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

An important characteristic of many logics for artificial intelligence is that they are nonmonotonic. This means that adding a formula to the premises can destroy some of the consequences. There may exist formulae that can always be safely added to the premises without destroying any of the consequences: they respect monotonicity. We consider three preferential logics for which we analyze the class of formulae which respect monotonicity. For each of the three logics we show that this class is equal to the class of formulae preserved under going to more preferred models, and we provide syntactic characterizations of these classes.

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.

References

  1. J.F.A.K. van Benthem, “Semantic parallels in natural language and computation”, in: H.D. Ebbinghaus et al. (eds.), Logic Colloquium, Granada 1987, North Holland, Amsterdam, 1989, pp. 331–375

    Google Scholar 

  2. C.C. Chang, H.J. Keisler, Model Theory, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1973

    Google Scholar 

  3. M. Davis, “The mathematics of non-monotonic reasoning”, Artificial Intelligence 13, 1980, pp. 73–80

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. J. Engelfriet, “Minimal Temporal Epistemic Logic”, Technical Report IR-388, Free University Amsterdam, Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, 1995. To appear in Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic.

    Google Scholar 

  5. D.W. Etherington, Reasoning with Incomplete Information, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc., Los Altos, California, 1988

    Google Scholar 

  6. J. Engelfriet, J. Treur, “A temporal model theory for default logic”, in: M. Clarke, R. Kruse, S. Moral (eds.), Proc. 2nd European Conference on Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning and Uncertainty, ECSQARU '93, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 747, Springer Verlag, 1993, pp. 91–96

    Google Scholar 

  7. J. Engelfriet, J. Treur, “Temporal theories of reasoning”, in: C. MacNish, D. Pearce, L.M. Pereira (eds.), Proceedings of the 4th European Workshop on Logics in Artificial Intelligence, JELIA '94, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 838, Springer Verlag, 1994, pp. 279–299. Also in: Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics 5 (2), 1995, pp. 239–261

    Google Scholar 

  8. J. Engelfriet, J. Treur, “Specification of nonmonotonic reasoning”, in: D.M. Gabbay, H.J. Ohlbach (eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference on Formal and Applied Practical Reasoning, FAPR'96, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 1085, Springer-Verlag, 1996, pp. 111–125

    Google Scholar 

  9. J.Y. Halpern, Y. Moses, “Towards a theory of knowledge and ignorance”, in: Proceedings of the Workshop on Non-monotonic Reasoning, AAAI, 1984, pp. 125–143

    Google Scholar 

  10. S. Kraus, D. Lehmann, M. Magidor, “Nonmonotonic Reasoning, Preferential Models and Cumulative Logics”, Artificial Intelligence 44, 1990, pp. 167–207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. J. McCarthy, “Epistemological problems of artificial intelligence”, in: Proceedings Fifth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 1977, pp. 1038–1044

    Google Scholar 

  12. J. McCarthy, “Circumscription — a form of non-monotonic reasoning”, Artificial Intelligence 13, 1980, pp. 27–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. J.-J. Ch. Meyer, W. van der Hoek, Epistemic Logic for Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence, Cambridge Tracts in Theoretical Computer Science 41, Cambridge University Press, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  14. R. Reiter, “A logic for default reasoning”, Artificial Intelligence 13, 1980, pp. 81–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. R. Reiter, “Equality and domain closure in first-order data bases”, Journal of the ACM 27, 1980, pp. 235–249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Y. Shoham, “A semantical approach to nonmonotonic logics”, in: Proceedings 10th IJCAI, 1987, pp. 388–392

    Google Scholar 

  17. Y. Shoham, Reasoning about Change, MIT Press, Cambridge, 1988

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, Free University Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1081a, 1081, HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Joeri Engelfriet

Authors
  1. Joeri Engelfriet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

José Jülio Alferes Luís Moniz Pereira Ewa Orlowska

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1996 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Engelfriet, J. (1996). Only persistence makes nonmonotonicity monotonous. In: Alferes, J.J., Pereira, L.M., Orlowska, E. (eds) Logics in Artificial Intelligence. JELIA 1996. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1126. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-61630-6_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-61630-6_11

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-61630-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-70643-4

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation