Abstract
In this paper we present a new interpretation of failure, a concept to which a lot of attention is being paid in the field of artificial intelligence research, especially due to the rise of the programming language PROLOG that treats negation as procedural failure. Our interpretation of failure, however, does not originate from research in the foundations of PROLOG. We present it here as an outcome of research on so-called dialogue logics, a tradition in logic research that envisages a logical proof as a formalized discussion between conflicting parties. Systems of formalized discussion that show the same logical behaviour as standard logical systems can be built. We show how such a system with additional fail operator can be used for the treatment of phenomena that are also relevant for natural language discourse. In the paper the following will be analyzed: negative questions, the paradox of the small number, and conditionals.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Barth, E.M., “A New Field: Empirical Logic, Bioprograms, Logemes and Logics as Institutions”, in Synthese 63, 1985
Barth, E.M. and Krabbe, E.C.W., From Axiom to Dialogue. A Philosophical Study of Logics and Argumentation, Berlin, 1982
Gabbay, D.M., “Modal Provability Foundations for Negation by Failure”, internal report Tl.8 ESPRIT project 393, ACORD, 1987
Harper, W.L. et al. (Eds), Ifs, Dordrecht, 1981
Hintikka, J. and Kulas, J., The Game of Language, Dordrecht, 1983
Hoepelman, J., “On Questions”, in Kiefer, F. (Ed), Questions and Answers, Dordrecht, 1983
Hoepelman, J. and van Hoof, A.J. M., “Two Party, Two Role Semantics: Knowledge Representation, Conditionals and Non-Monotonicity” Unpublished Paper, IAO-Stuttgart, 1989
Hoepelman, J. Ph., and van Hoof, A.J.M., “The Success of Failure. The concept of failure in dialogue logics and its relevance for NL-semantics.” Coling 1988, Vol. 1, pp. 250–254.
Kiefer, F.(Ed), Questions and Answers, Dordrecht, 1983
Krabbe, E., “Non-cumulative Dialectical Models and Formal Dialectics”, in Philosophical Logic 14, 1985, pp. 129–168.
Lorenzen, P. and Lorenz, K., Dialogische Logik, Darmstadt, 1978
McDermott, D. and Doyle, J., “Non-Monotonic Logic I”, in Artificial Intelligence 13, 1980
Tichy, P., “Subjunctive Conditionals: Two Parameters vs. Three.” Philosophical Studies 45, 1984, pp. 147–179.
Valerius, R., “The Logic of Frame- and Stop-rules in Lorenzen Games.”Dissertation, University of Stuttgart, 1989.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1990 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Hoepelman, J.P., van Hoof, A.J.M. (1990). Dialogue Models for Knowledge Representation. In: Endres-Niggemeyer, B., Herrmann, T., Kobsa, A., Rösner, D. (eds) Interaktion und Kommunikation mit dem Computer. Informatik-Fachberichte, vol 238. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-75591-0_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-75591-0_5
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-52413-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-75591-0
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive