Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

Minimal model semantics for sorted constraint representation

  • Regular Papers
  • Published:
Journal of Computer Science and Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Sorted constraint representation is a very useful representation in AI which combines class hierarchies and constraint networks. For such sorted constraint representation, a problem is how to generalize the idea of default inheritance to constraint network, where the attributes in a class or between different classes interact with each other via the network. To give a formal account for the defeasible reasoning in such representation, a general sorted constraint logic is proposed, and a minimal-model semantics for the logic is presented.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

References

  1. Ait-Kaci H, Podelski P. Towards a meaning of LIFE.J. Logic Programming, 1993, 16: 195–234.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Borning A. ThingLab—An object oriented system for building simulations using constraints. InProceedings IJCAI-77, Cambridge, MA, 1977, pp. 497–499.

  3. Borning A, Duisberg R, Freeman-Benson B, Kramer A, Woolf M. Constraint hierarchies. InACM OOPSLA’87 Conference Proceedings, pp.48–60.

  4. Brewkwa G. Preferred subtheories: An extended logical framework for default reasoning. InIJCAI-89, Detroit, 1989, pp. 1043–1048.

  5. Davis D. Constraint propagation with interval labels.Artificial Intelligence, 1987, 32: 281–331.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. Davis R. Diagnosis via causal reasoning: Paths of interaction and the locality principles. InProc. AAAI-83, Washington D.C., 1983, pp.88–92.

  7. Freeman-Benson B, Borning A. Integrating constraints with an object-oriented language. InProc. of the 1992 European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, June 1992, pp.268–286.

  8. Horty J F, Thomason R H, Touretzky D S. A skeptical of inheritance in nonmonotonic semantic networks.Artificial Intelligence, 1990, 42: 311–348.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Wilson M, Borning A. Hierarchical constraint logic programming.J. Logic Programming, 1993, 16: 277–318.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Junker U. Prioritized defaults: Implementation by TMS and application to diagnosis. InProc. IJCAI-91, Sydney, 1991, pp.310–315.

  11. Liao Lejian, Shi Zhongzhi. Prioritized default constraint reasoning. InProc. of the 3rd Int’l Conf. for Young Computer Scientists, 1993, pp.2.45–47.

  12. Pollock J L. Defeasible reasoning.Cogn. Sci., 1987, 11: 481–518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Poole D. On the comparison of theories: Preferring the most specific explanations. InProc. IJCAI-85, Los Angeles, CA, 1985, 144–147.

  14. Poole D. A logical framework for default reasoning.Artificial Intelligence, 1988, 36: 27–47.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  15. Reiter R. A logic for default reasoning.Artificial Intelligence, 1980, 13: 81–132.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  16. Shoham Y. A semantical approach to non-monotonic logics. InProc. IEEE Symp. Logic in Computer Science, Ithaca, New York, 1986.

  17. Simari G R, Loui R P. A mathematical treatment of defeasible reasoning and its implementation.Artificial Intelligence, 1992, 53: 125–127.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. Touretzky D S, Horty J F, Thomason R H. A clash of intuitions: The current state of nonmonotonic multiple inheritance systems. InProc. IJCAI-87, Milan, Italy, Aug. 1987, pp. 476–482.

  19. Touretzky D S, Thomason R H, Horty J F. A skeptic menagerie: Conflictors, preemptors, reinstaters, and zombies in nonmonotonic inheritance. InIJCAI-91, pp. 478–483.

  20. Waltz D. Understanding line drawing of scenes with shadows. In P. Winston (ed.)The Psychology of Computer Vision, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Winston P H. Artificial Intelligence. Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley, 1977.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Computing Technology, The Chinese Academy of Sciences, 100080, Beijing

    Liao Lejian & Shi Zhongzhi

Authors
  1. Liao Lejian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shi Zhongzhi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Liao Lejian obtained his M.E. degree from the Institute of Computing Technology, The Chinese Academy of Sciences, in 1988 and his Ph.D. degree from the Software Institution, Chinese Academy of Sciences in 1994. He has been working in the area of expert system, knowledge representation, and automated reasoning for ten years. His current academic interests include feasible reasoning, constraint satisfaction techniques and constraint languages, and applications of the techniques in engineering.

Shi Zhongzhi is a Professor of the Institute of Computing Technology, The Chinese Academy of Sciences. He is engaged in research on Artificial Intelligence, Neural Computing, Cognitive Science and Machine Learning. At present, he is the Chairman of IFIP TC12/WG12.3, a member of PRICAI Standing Scientific Committee, and the Vice President of Chinese Association on Artificial Intelligence.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Liao, L., Shi, Z. Minimal model semantics for sorted constraint representation. J. of Comput. Sci. & Technol. 10, 439–446 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02948339

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02948339

Keywords

Search

Navigation