Abstract
In this paper, we introduce a new concept of generalized partial meet contraction for contracting a sentence from a belief base. We show that a special case of belief dynamics, referred to as knowledge base dynamics, where certain part of the belief base is declared to be immutable, has interesting connections with abduction, thus enabling us to use abductive procedures to realize contractions. Finally, an important application of knowledge base dynamics in providing an axiomatic characterization for deleting view atoms from databases is discussed in detail.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Abiteboul, S., Updates: A new Frontier, In: M. Gyssens, J. Paredaens, and D. Van Gucht (eds.), Proc. of the second international conference on database theory, LNCS 326, Springer-Verlag, 1988, pp. 1–18.
Alchourrón, C.E., Gärdenfors, P., and Makinson, D., On the logic of theory change: Partial meet contraction and revision functions, The Journal of Symbolic Logic 50 Number 2 (1985) 510–530.
Alchourrón, C.E., and Makinson, D., On the logic of theory change: Safe contraction, Studia Logica 44:405–422 (1985).
Aravindan, C. and Dung, P.M., Partial deduction of logic programs wrt well-founded semantics, In: H. Kirchner and G. Levi (eds.), Proc. of the 3rd International Conf. on Algebraic and Logic Programming, LNCS 632, Springer-Verlag, 1992, pp. 384–402.
Aravindan, C. and Dung, P.M., Relationship between Gärdenfors-Makinson's epistemic entrenchment and Katsuno-Mendelzon's faithful total pre-orders, To appear in: Proc. of the International Conference on Expert Systems Development, IEEE, March 1994.
Benkerimi, K. and Shepherdson, J.C., Partial evaluation of dynamic logic programs, Technical Report TR-90-27, University of Bristol, U.K., November 1990.
Bol, R.N., Apt, K.R., and Klop, J.W., An analysis of loop checking mechanisms for logic programs, Theoretical Computer Science 86 No. 1 (1991) 35–79.
Bol, R.N., Loop checking in partial deduction, The Journal of Logic Programming 16 No. 1&2 (1993) 25–46.
Bry, F., Intensional Updates: Abduction via deduction, In: Proc. of the 7th International Conf. on Logic Programming, 1990.
Dayal, U. and Bernstein, P.A., On the correct translation of update operations on relational views, ACM Transactions on Database Systems 8 No. 3 (1982) 381–416.
Decker, H., Drawing updates from derivations, Technical Report IR-KB-65, ECRC, Germany, September 1989.
Demolombe, R., A strategy for the computation of conditional answers, In: Proc. of ECAI '92, 1992.
Fagin, R., Kuper, G.M., Ullman, J.D., and Vardi, M.Y., Updating logical databases, In: Advances in Computing Research, Volume 3, Jai Press Inc., 1986, pp. 1–18.
Fuhrmann, A., Theory contraction through base contraction, Journal of Philosophical Logic 20 (1991) 175–203.
Gärdenfors, P. and Makinson, D., Revisions of knowledge systems using epistemic entrenchment, In: M.Y. Vardi (ed.), Proc. of the second conf. on Theoretical aspects of Reasoning about Knowledge, Morgan Kaufmann, 1988, pp. 83–95.
Gärdenfors, P., Belief Revision: An Introduction, In: P.Gärdenfors (ed.), Belief Revision, Cambridge University Press, 1992, pp. 1–28.
Gärdenfors, P. and Rott, H., Belief Revision, To appear in: Handbook of logic in AI and logic programming, Vol. IV: Epistemic and Temporal Reasoning.
Grove, A., Two modellings for theory change, Journal of Philosophical Logic 17 (1988) 157–170.
Guessoum, A. and Lloyd, J.W., Updating Knowledge Bases, Technical Report TR-89-05, Department of computer science, University of Bristol, U.K., December 1989.
Guessom, A. and Lloyd, J.W., Updating Knowledge Bases II, Technical Report TR-90-13, Department of computer science, University of Bristol, U.K., May 1990.
Hansson, S.O., Belief contraction without recovery, Studia Logica 50(2):251–260 (1991).
Hansson, S.O., Belief base dynamics, Doctoral dissertation, Uppsala university, Sweden, 1991.
Hansson, S.O., In defense of base contraction, Synthese 91:239–245 (1992).
Hansson, S.O., Bridging a gap between AI research and philosophy, In: E. Sandewall, and C.G. Jansson (eds.), Proc. of the Scandinavian conf. on Artificial Intelligence '93, IOS Press, 1993, pp. 1–9.
Hansson, S.O., Theory contraction and base contraction unified, Journal of Symbolic Logic, in press.
Hansson, S.O., Kernel Contraction, Journal of Symbolic Logic, in press.
Kakas, A.C., Kowalski, RA., and Toni, F., Abductive logic programming, Journal of Logic and Computation 2 (1992) 719–770.
Kakas, A.C., and Mancarella, P., Database updates through abduction, Technical Report, Department of Computing, Imperial College, London, U.K., 1990.
Katsuno, H. and Mendelzon, A.O., Prepositional knowledge base revision and minimal change, Artificial Intelligence 52 (1991) 263–294.
Kowalski, R., Logic without model theory, Technical Report, Department of Computing, Imperial College, London, U.K., 1994. (available on Internet from LPNMR Archive <ftp.ms.uky.edu>)
Langerak, R., View updates in relational databases with an independent scheme, ACM Transactions on Database Systems 15 No. 1 (1990) 40–66.
Lindström, S. and Rabinowicz, W., Epistemic entrenchment with incomparabilities and relational belief revision, In: A. Fuhrmann and M. Morreau (eds.), Proc. of the Workshop on The logic of theroy change, LNAI 465, Springer-Verlag, 1991, pp. 93–126.
Lloyd, J.W., Foundations of logic programming, Second extended edition, Springer-Verlag, 1987.
Lloyd, J.W., and Shepherdson, J.C., Partial evaluation in logic programming, Technical Report No. CS-87-09, University of Bristol, U.K., 1987.
Makinson, D., How to give it up: A survey of some formal aspects of the logic of theory change, Synthese 62 (1985) 347–363.
Makinson, D., On the status of the postulate of recovery in the logic of theory change, Journal of Philosophical Logic 16 (1987) 383–394.
Nebel, B., A knowledge level analysis of belief revision, In: R.J. Brachman, H.J. Levesque, and R. Reiter (eds.), Proc. of the first international conference on principles of knowledge representation and reasoning, Morgan Kaufmann, 1989, pp. 301–311.
Nebel, B., Belief revision and default reasoning: Syntax-based approaches, In: J.A. Allen, R. Fikes, and E. Sandewall (eds.), Proc. of the second international conference on Principles of knowledge representation and reasoning, Morgan Kaufmann, 1991, pp. 417–428.
Pereira, L.M., Calejo, M., and AparÃcio, J.N., Refining knowledge base updates, In: Proc. of the 7th Brazilian Symposium on Artificial Intelligence, November, 1990.
Sadri, F. and Kowalski, R., A theorem proving approach to database integrity, In: J. Minker (ed.), Foundations of deductive databases and logic programming, Morgan Kaufmann, 1988, pp. 313–362.
Tomasic, A., View update translation via deduction and annotation, In: M. Gyssens, J. Paredaens, and D. Van Gucht (eds.), Proc. of ICDT '88, LNCS 326, Springer-Verlag, 1988, pp. 338–352.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1994 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Aravindan, C., Dung, P.M. (1994). Belief dynamics, abduction, and databases. In: MacNish, C., Pearce, D., Pereira, L.M. (eds) Logics in Artificial Intelligence. JELIA 1994. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 838. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0021965
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0021965
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-58332-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-48657-2
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive