Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Underlying semantics for the assessment of Reiter's solution to the frame problem

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Advances in Artificial Intelligence (SBIA 1995)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 991))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 138 Accesses

Abstract

This paper presents an application of Sandewall's methodology [16] for assessing nonmonotonic entailment criteria for reasoning about actions and change. We establish the correctness of Reiter's general solution to the frame problem [14] for a broad and well characterized class of problems. This is done by: (1) identifying a nonmonotonic entailment criterion corresponding to Reiter's solution: (2) discovering ontological and epistemological assumptions that we believe underly the domains of possible applicability of Reiter's approach: (3) defining an underlying semantics corresponding to these assumptions: and (4) providing a semantic correspondence between the models selected by the entailment criterion and the models obtained from the underlying semantics. We also compare our methodology to Kartha's evaluation [6] of Reiter's general solution with respect to action logic semantics [4].

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. Bedrax-Weiss, T., Bertossi, L.: An assessment of Reiter's general monotonic solution to the frame problem and its applicability to database updates. ECAI-LAC (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bedrax-Weiss, T., Bertossi, L.: An assessment of Reiter's general monotonic solution to the frame problem and its applicability to database updates. Tech. Rept. P. Universidad Catolica de Chile. Dept. de Ciencia de la Computacion. Santiago. Chile. RP-PUC-DCC-94-1 (1994) 1–25

    Google Scholar 

  3. Clark, K.L.: Negation as failure. Logic and Databases. Plenum Press. New York (1978) 292–392

    Google Scholar 

  4. Gelfond, M. and Lifschitz, V.: Describing action and change by logic programs. Joint International Conference and Symposium on Logic Programming (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Haas, A.: The case for domain-specific frame axioms. Workshop: The frame problem in artificial intelligence. (1987) 343–348

    Google Scholar 

  6. Kartha, G.N.: Soundness and completeness theorems for three formalizations of action. IJCAI-93. Chambery. France (1993) 724–729

    Google Scholar 

  7. Lin, F., Reiter, R.: State constraints revisited. Journal of Logic and Computation. Special issue on actions and processes 4 (1994) 655–678

    Google Scholar 

  8. McCarthy, J., Hayes, P.: Some philosophical problems from the standpoint of artiicial intelligence. Machine Intelligence 4 (1969) 463–502

    Google Scholar 

  9. Pednault, E.: ADL: Exploring the middle ground between STRIPS and the situation calculus. KR-89. (1989) 324–332

    Google Scholar 

  10. Reiter, R.: Formalizing database evolution in the situation calculus. Fifth Generation Computer Systems. Tokyo. Japan (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Reiter, R.: Equality and domain closure in first-order databases. JACM 27 (1980) 235–249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Reiter. R.: Towards a logical reconstruction of relational databases theory. On Conceptual Modelling: Perspectives from Artificial Intelligence. Databases and Programming Languages. Springer-Verlag (1984) 191–233

    Google Scholar 

  13. Reiter, R.: A sound and sometimes complete query evaluation algorithm for relational databases with null values. JACM 2 (1986) 349–370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Reiter. R.: The frame problem in the situation calculus: a simple solution (sometimes) and a completeness result for goal regression. AI and Math. Theory of Computation: Papers in Honor of John McCarthy. Academic Press. (1991) 359–380

    Google Scholar 

  15. Reiter, R.: On specifying database updates. Tech. Rept. University of Toronto. Dept. of Computer Science. Toronto. Canada. KRR-TR-92-3 (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Sandewall. E.: Features and Fluents. The Representation of Knowledge about Dynamical Systems 1. Oxford University Press (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Schubert. L.: Monotonic solution of the frame problem in the situation calculus: an efficient method for worlds with fully specified actions. Knowledge Representation and Defeasible Reasoning. Kluwer Academic Press. (1990) 23–67

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CIRL and University of Oregon, 1269 University of Oregon, 97403-1269, Eugene, OR

    Tania Bedrax-Weiss

  2. Departamento de Ciencia de la Computacion. Escuela de Ingenieria, Pontificia Unviersidad Catolica de Chile, Casilla 306, Correo 22., Santiago, Chile

    Leopoldo E. Bertossi

Authors
  1. Tania Bedrax-Weiss
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Leopoldo E. Bertossi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Jacques Wainer Ariadne Carvalho

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1995 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Bedrax-Weiss, T., Bertossi, L.E. (1995). Underlying semantics for the assessment of Reiter's solution to the frame problem. In: Wainer, J., Carvalho, A. (eds) Advances in Artificial Intelligence. SBIA 1995. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 991. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0034799

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0034799

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-60436-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-47467-8

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation