nach oben

Erschienen in:

2022 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

Inference to the Stable Explanations

verfasst von : Guido Governatori, Francesco Olivieri, Antonino Rotolo, Matteo Cristani

Erschienen in: Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning

Verlag: Springer International Publishing

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

The process of explaining a piece of evidence by constructing a set of assumptions that are a good explanation for that evidence is ubiquitous in real-life (e.g. in legal systems). In this paper, we introduce, discuss, and formalise the notion of stable explanations in a non-monotonic setting. We show how, while applying it to the process of (1) computing a set of literals able to (2) derive a conclusion (3) from a set of defeasible rules, we obtain a restricted version of the notion of abduction. This is both interesting and useful: when an explanation for a given conclusion is stable, it can, in fact, be used to infer the same conclusion independently of other pieces of evidence that are found afterwards.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Vorheriges Kapitel Reasoning About Actions with Ontologies and Temporal Answer Sets for DLTL

Nächstes Kapitel Semantics for Conditional Literals via the SM Operator

Notice that we use \(d_i\) as a variable for a clause in the 3-SAT instance and as a literal (representing the clause) in the corresponding defeasible logic encoding.

Antoniou, G., Billington, D., Governatori, G., Maher, M.: Representation results for defeasible logic. ACM Trans. Comput. Log. 2(2), 255–287 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1145/371316.371517MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

Augusto, J., Simari, G.: Temporal argumentative system. AI Commun. 12(4), 237–257 (1999)MathSciNet

Batens, D.: Abduction logics: Illustrating pitfalls of defeasible methods. Logic Argumentation Reasoning 14, 169–193 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58507-9_8MathSciNetCrossRef

Billington, D., Antoniou, G., Governatori, G., Maher, M.: Revising nonmonotonic theories: the case of defeasible logic. In: Burgard, W., Cremers, A.B., Cristaller, T. (eds.) KI 1999. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1701, pp. 101–112. Springer, Heidelberg (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-48238-5_8CrossRef

Brewka, G., Thimm, M., Ulbricht, M.: Strong inconsistency. Artif. Intell. 267, 78–117 (2019). http://dblp.uni-trier.de/db/journals/ai/ai267.html#BrewkaTU19

Brewka, G., Ulbricht, M.: Strong explanations for nonmonotonic reasoning. In: Lutz, C., Sattler, U., Tinelli, C., Turhan, A.-Y., Wolter, F. (eds.) Description Logic, Theory Combination, and All That. LNCS, vol. 11560, pp. 135–146. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-22102-7_6CrossRef

Bylander, T., Allemang, D., Tanner, M.C., Josephson, J.R.: The computational complexity of abduction. Artif. Intell. 49(1), 25–60 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1016/0004-3702(91)90005-5MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

Delrieux, C.: Abductive inference in defeasible reasoning: A model for research programmes. J. Appl. Log. 2(4), 409–437 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jal.2004.07.003MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

Eiter, T., Gottlob, G.: The complexity of logic-based abduction. J. ACM (JACM) 42(1), 3–42 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1145/200836.200838MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

10.

Eiter, T., Gottlob, G., Leone, N.: Abduction from logic programs: semantics and complexity. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 189(1–2), 129–177 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1016/s0304-3975(96)00179-xMathSciNetCrossRefMATH

11.

Eiter, T., Gottlob, G., Leone, N.: Semantics and complexity of abduction from default theories. Artif. Intell. 90(1–2), 177–223 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1016/s0004-3702(96)00040-9MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

12.

Governatori, G., Olivieri, F., Cristani, M., Scannapieco, S.: Revision of defeasible preferences. Int. J. Approximate Reasoning 104, 205–230 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijar.2018.10.020MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

13.

Governatori, G., Olivieri, F., Scannapieco, S., Cristani, M.: Superiority based revision of defeasible theories. In: Dean, M., Hall, J., Rotolo, A., Tabet, S. (eds.) RuleML 2010. LNCS, vol. 6403, pp. 104–118. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-16289-3_10CrossRef

14.

Governatori, G., Maher, M.J., Billington, D., Antoniou, G.: Argumentation semantics for defeasible logics. J. Log. Comput. 14(5), 675–702 (2004)MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

15.

Governatori, G., Olivieri, F., Cristani, M., Scannapieco, S.: Revision of defeasible preferences. Int. J. Approx. Reason. 104, 205–230 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijar.2018.10.020

16.

Governatori, G., Padmanabhan, V., Rotolo, A., Sattar, A.: A defeasible logic for modelling policy-based intentions and motivational attitudes. Log. J. IGPL 17(3), 227–265 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1093/jigpal/jzp006MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

17.

Harman, G.H.: The inference to the best explanation. Philos. Rev. 74(1), 88–95 (1965). https://doi.org/10.2307/2183532CrossRef

18.

Lycke, H.: A formal explication of the search for explanations: the adaptive logics approach to abductive reasoning. Logic J. IGPL 20(2), 497–516 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1093/jigpal/jzq053MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

19.

Maher, M.J.: Propositional defeasible logic has linear complexity. Theory Pract. Logic Program. 1(6), 691–711 (2001)MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

20.

Nute, D.: Defeasible reasoning. In: Proceedings of the Hawaii International Conference on System Science, vol. 3, pp. 470–477 (1987)

21.

Pfandler, A., Pichler, R., Woltran, S.: The complexity of handling minimal solutions in logic-based abduction. J. Log. Comput. 25(3), 805–825 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1093/logcom/exu053MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

22.

Shoham, Y.: Chronological ignorance: Experiments in nonmonotonic temporal reasoning. Artif. Intell. 36(3), 279–331 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1016/0004-3702(88)90085-9MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

23.

Snaith, M., Reed, C.: Argument revision. J. Log. Comput. 27(7), 2089–2134 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1093/logcom/exw028MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

Titel: Inference to the Stable Explanations
verfasst von: Guido Governatori
Francesco Olivieri
Antonino Rotolo
Matteo Cristani
Verlag: Springer International Publishing
Buch: Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-15706-6

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-031-15707-3

Copyright-Jahr: 2022
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-15707-3_19

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Premium Partner