Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Australasian Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence

AI 2013: AI 2013: Advances in Artificial Intelligence pp 338–349Cite as

Relative Expressiveness of Well-Founded Defeasible Logics

  • Conference paper

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 8272))

Abstract

An approach to formulating relative expressiveness of defeasible logics was introduced in [14]. In this paper we address the relative expressiveness of the well-founded defeasible logics in the framework WFDL and their relationship to the defeasible logics in the framework DL. We show that, in terms of defeasible reasoning, the logics in WFDL have greater (or equal) expressiveness than those in DL, but it is not clear whether they have strictly greater expressiveness. We also show that different treatments of ambiguity lead to different expressiveness in WFDL, as it does in DL.

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

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Antoniou, G., Billington, D., Governatori, G., Maher, M.J.: On the modelling and analysis of regulations. In: Proc. Australasian Conf. on Information Systems, pp. 20–29 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Antoniou, G., Billington, D., Governatori, G., Maher, M.J.: Representation results for defeasible logic. ACM Trans. Comput. Log. 2(2), 255–287 (2001)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Antoniou, G., Billington, D., Governatori, G., Maher, M.J.: Embedding defeasible logic into logic programming. TPLP 6(6), 703–735 (2006)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Bassiliades, N., Antoniou, G., Vlahavas, I.P.: A defeasible logic reasoner for the semantic web. Int. J. Semantic Web Inf. Syst. 2(1), 1–41 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Billington, D., Antoniou, G., Governatori, G., Maher, M.J.: An inclusion theorem for defeasible logics. ACM Trans. Comput. 12(1), 6 (2010)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. Dumas, M., Governatori, G., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Oaks, P.: A formal approach to negotiating agents development. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 1(2), 193–207 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Dung, P.M.: On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Artif. Intell. 77(2), 321–358 (1995)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Gelder, A.V., Ross, K.A., Schlipf, J.S.: The well-founded semantics for general logic programs. J. ACM 38(3), 620–650 (1991)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Governatori, G.: Representing business contracts in ruleml. Int. J. Cooperative Inf. Syst. 14(2-3), 181–216 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Governatori, G., Rotolo, A.: Changing legal systems: legal abrogations and annulments in defeasible logic. Logic Journal of the IGPL 18(1), 157–194 (2010)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Governatori, G., Rotolo, A., Padmanabhan, V.: The cost of social agents. In: Nakashima, H., Wellman, M.P., Weiss, G., Stone, P. (eds.) AAMAS, pp. 513–520. ACM (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Grosof, B.N.: Prioritized conflict handling for logic programs. In: ILPS, pp. 197–211 (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Grosof, B.N., Labrou, Y., Chan, H.Y.: A declarative approach to business rules in contracts: courteous logic programs in XML. In: ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce, pp. 68–77 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Maher, M.J.: Relative expressiveness of defeasible logics. TPLP 12(4-5), 793–810 (2012)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Maher, M.J.: Relative expressiveness of defeasible logics II. TPLP 13(4-5), 579–592 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Maher, M.J., Governatori, G.: A semantic decomposition of defeasible logics. In: AAAI/IAAI, pp. 299–305. AAAI Press (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Maier, F., Nute, D.: Ambiguity propagating defeasible logic and the well-founded semantics. In: Fisher, M., van der Hoek, W., Konev, B., Lisitsa, A. (eds.) JELIA 2006. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4160, pp. 306–318. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  18. Maier, F., Nute, D.: Well-founded semantics for defeasible logic. Synthese 176(2), 243–274 (2010)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Nute, D.: Defeasible logic. In: Bartenstein, O., Geske, U., Hannebauer, M., Yoshie, O. (eds.) INAP 2001. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2543, pp. 151–169. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  20. Prakken, H.: Logical Tools for Modelling Legal Argument: A Study of Defeasible Reasoning in Law. Kluwer (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Rahwan, I., Simari, G.: Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence. Springer (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Reeves, D.M., Wellman, M.P., Grosof, B.N.: Automated negotiation from declarative contract descriptions. Computational Intelligence 18(4), 482–500 (2002)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Engineering and Information Technology, The University of New South Wales, Canberra, ACT, 2600, Australia

    Michael J. Maher

Authors
  1. Michael J. Maher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Information Science, University of Otago, 9054, Dunedin, New Zealand

    Stephen Cranefield

  2. Macquarie University, 2109, Sydney, NSW, Australia

    Abhaya Nayak

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Maher, M.J. (2013). Relative Expressiveness of Well-Founded Defeasible Logics. In: Cranefield, S., Nayak, A. (eds) AI 2013: Advances in Artificial Intelligence. AI 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 8272. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-03680-9_35

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-03680-9_35

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-03679-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-03680-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation