Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Introduction
Background
Conclusions
References
All Topics
Philosophy
Logic

G’3-Stable Semantics and Inconsistency

Profile image of Claudia Latorre ZepedaClaudia Latorre Zepeda

2009, Computación y Sistemas (México) Num.1 Vol.13

https://doi.org/10.13053/CYS-13-1-1223
visibility

…

description

12 pages

link

1 file

Abstract

We present an overview on how to perform non-monotonic reasoning based on paraconsistent logics. In particular, we show that one can define a logic programming semantics based on the paraconsistent logic G' 3 which is called G' 3-stable semantics. This semantics defines a frame for performing non-monotonic reasoning in domains which are pervaded with vagueness and inconsistencies. In fact, we show that, by considering also a possibilistic logic point of view, one can use this extended framework for defining a possibilistic logic programming approach able to deal with reasoning, which is at the same time non-monotonic and uncertain.

Related papers

Revised Stable Models - A Semantics for Logic Programs
Alexandre Miguel Pinto, Luís Moniz Pereira

2005

This paper introduces an original 2-valued semantics for Normal Logic Programs (NLP), which conservatively extends the Stable Model semantics (SM) to all normal programs. The distinction consists in the revision of one feature of SM, namely its treatment of odd loops, and of infinitely long support chains, over default negation. This single revised aspect, addressed by means of a Reductio ad Absurdum approach, affords a number of fruitful consequences, namely regarding existence, relevance and top-down querying, cumulativity, and implementation. The paper motivates and defines the Revised Stable Models semantics (rSM), justifying and exemplifying it. Properties of rSM are given and contrasted with those of SM. Furthermore, these results apply to SM whenever odd loops and infinitely long chains over negation are absent, thereby establishing significant, not previously known, properties of SM. Conclusions, further work, terminate the paper.

View PDFchevron_right
Monotonic Reasoning from a Proof-Theoretic Perspective
Raffaella Bernardi

1999

The article presents the first results we have obtained studying natural reasoning from a proof-theoretic perspective. In particular, we focus our attention on monotonicity reasoning: Inferences are made using structurally parsed sentences on which monotonic positions are displayed. The monotonicity markers are propagated through the proofs via the combined structural and logical rules for the unary operators of Multimodal Categorial Grammar (MMCG). We have chosen to work with such an expressive 'grammar logic' in order to avoid both the use of extra-logical marking devices as made in [SV91] and a too complex lexicon . With MMCG as the parser, the system is able to make the derivations fully within the logic.

View PDFchevron_right
Non-Monotonic Extensions of Logic Programming
Luís Moniz Pereira

Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 1997

View PDFchevron_right
LogAG: An algebraic non-monotonic logic for reasoning with graded propositions
Haythem Osman Ismail

Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, 2020

We present Log A G, a weighted algebraic non-monotonic logic for reasoning with graded beliefs. Log A G is algebraic in that it is a language of only terms, some of which denote propositions and may be associated with ordered grades. The grades could be taken to represent a wide variety of phenomena including preference degrees, priority levels, trust ranks, and uncertainty measures. Reasoning in Log A G is non-monotonic and may give rise to contradictions. Belief revision is, hence, an integral part of reasoning and is guided by the grades. This yields a quite expressive language providing an interesting alternative to the currently existing approaches to non-monotonicity. We show how Log A G can be utilised for modelling resource-bounded reasoning; simulating inconclusive reasoning with circular, liar-like sentences; and reasoning about information arriving over a chain of sources each with a different degree of trust. While there certainly are accounts in the literature for each of these issues, we are not aware of any single framework that accounts for them all like Log A G does. We also show how Log A G captures a wide variety of non-monotonic logical formalisms. As such, Log A G is a unifying framework for non-monotonicity which is flexible enough to admit a wide array of potential uses.

View PDFchevron_right
Revised Stable Models-a new semantics for logic programs
Luís Moniz Pereira

2004

Abstract This paper introduces an original 2-valued semantics for Normal Logic Programs (NLP), important on its own. Nevertheless, its name draws attention to that it is inspired by and generalizes Stable Model semantics (SM). The definitional distinction consists in the revision of one feature of SM, namely its treatment of odd loops over default negation.

View PDFchevron_right
Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning
Son Tran

Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2005

We introduce a family of partial stable model semantics for logic programs with arbitrary aggregate relations. The semantics are parametrized by the interpretation of aggregate relations in three-valued logic. Any semantics in this family satisfies two important properties: (i) it extends the partial stable semantics for normal logic programs and (ii) total stable models are always minimal. We also give a specific instance of the semantics and show that it has several attractive features.

View PDFchevron_right
The Well-Founded Semantics in Normal Logic Programs with Uncertainty
umberto straccia

Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2002

Many frameworks of logic programming have been proposed to manage uncertain information in deductive databases and expert systems. Roughly, on the basis of how uncertainty is associated to facts and the rules in a program, they can be classified into implication-based (IB) and annotation-based (AB). However, one fundamental issue that remains unaddressed in the IB approach is the representation and the manipulation of the non-monotonic mode of negation, an important feature for real applications. Our focus in this paper is to introduce nonmonotonic negation in the parametric IB framework, a unifying umbrella for IB frameworks. The semantical approach that we will adopt is based on the well-founded semantics, one of the most widely studied and used semantics of (classical) logic programs with negation.

View PDFchevron_right
Belief revision in non-monotonic reasoning
Luís Moniz Pereira

Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 1995

View PDFchevron_right
Non-deterministic semantics for logics with a consistency operator
Arnon Avron

International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, 2007

In order to handle inconsistent knowledge bases in a reasonable way, one needs a logic which allows nontrivial inconsistent theories. Logics of this sort are called paraconsistent. One of the oldest and best known approaches to the problem of designing useful paraconsistent logics is da Costa's approach, which seeks to allow the use of classical logic whenever it is safe to do so, but behaves completely differently when contradictions are involved. da Costa's approach has led to the family of logics of formal (in)consistency (LFIs). In this paper we provide in a modular way simple nondeterministic semantics for 64 of the most important logics from this family. Our semantics is three-valued for some of the systems, and infinite-valued for the others. We prove that these results cannot be improved: neither of the systems with a three-valued non-deterministic semantics has either a finite characteristic ordinary matrix or a two-valued characteristic non-deterministic matrix, and neither of the other systems we investigate has a finite characteristic non-deterministic matrix. Still, our semantics provides decision procedures for all the systems investigated, as well as easy proofs of important proof-theoretical properties of them.

View PDFchevron_right
Prolegomena to logic programming for non-monotonic reasoning
Luís Moniz Pereira

1997

The present prolegomena consist, as all indeed do, in a critical discussion serving to introduce and interpret the extended works that follow in this book. As a result, the book is not a mere collection of excellent papers in their own specialty, but provides also the basics of the motivation, background history, important themes, bridges to other areas, and a common technical platform of the principal formalisms and approaches, augmented with examples.

View PDFchevron_right

References (32)

  1. Baral C., Knowledge Representation, Reasoning and Declarative Problem Solving. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2003
  2. Bench-Capon T. J. M. and Dunne P. E., Argumentation in artificial intelligence. Artificial Intelligence, 171 (10-15): 619-641 (2007).
  3. Béziau J., Paraconsistent logic from a modal viewpoint. Journal of Applied Logic, 3:7-14 (2005).
  4. Carballido J. L., Nieves J. C., and Osorio M., Inferring Preferred Extensions by Pstable Semantics. Iberoamerican Journal of Artificial Intelligence (Inteligencia Artificial), 13(41): 38-53 (2009).
  5. Carnielli W. A., Coniglio M., and Marcos J., Logics of formal inconsistency. Handbook of Philosophical Logic, 14:(15-107), Springer, 2007.
  6. da Costa N. C. A., On the theory of inconsistent formal systems (in Portuguese). PhD thesis, UFPR Curitiva, 1963.
  7. de Amo S., Carnielli W. A., and Marcos J., Formal inconsistency and evolutionary databases. Logic and Logical Philosophy, 8(1):115-152 (2000).
  8. de Amo S., Carnielli W. A., and Marcos J., A logical framework for integrating inconsistent information in multiple databases. Paper presented at FOIKS, Vol.2284 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer, 2002, 67-84.
  9. Donini F. M., Nardi D., and Rosati R., Ground nonmonotonic modal logics. Logic and Computation, 7(4) (1997).
  10. Dubois D., Lang J., and Prade H., Possibilistic logic. In D. Gabbay, C. J. Hogger, and J. A. Robinson, editors, Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming, Vol. 3 of Nonmonotonic Reasoning and Uncertain Reasoning, Oxford University Press, 1994, 439-513.
  11. Gelfond M. and Lifschitz V., The Stable Model Semantics for Logic Programming. In Kowalski R. and Bowen K., editors. Paper presented at 5th Conference on Logic Programming, MIT Press, 1988, 1070-1080.
  12. Gelfond M. and Lifschitz V., Logic Programs with Classical Negation. In D. Warren and P. Szeredi, Editors. Paper presented at 7th Int. Conf. on Logic Programming, Jerusalem, Israel, MIT Press, 1990, 579-597.
  13. Konolige K., On the relation between default and autoepistemic logic. In M. L. Ginsberg, editor, Readings in Nonmonotonic Reasoning,. Kaufmann, Los Altos, CA, 1987, 195-226.
  14. López A., Implementing pstable. Paper presented at LoLaCOM, CEUR Vol 220, on line: http://ftp.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/Publications/CEUR-WS/Vol-220/, Apizaco, Tlaxcala, 2006.
  15. McDermott D., Nonmonotonic logic II: Nonmonotonic modal theories. ACM Transactions on Computer Systems, 29: 33-57 (1982).
  16. McDermott D. and Doyle J., Non-monotonic logic I. Artificial Intelligence, 13:41-72 (1980).
  17. Mendelson E., Introduction to Mathematical Logic. Wadsworth, Belmont, CA, third edition, 1987.
  18. Minsky M., A framework for representing knowledge. In P. Winston, editor, The Psychology of Computer Vision, Mcgraw-Hill, New York, 1975.
  19. Nicolas P., Garcia L., Stéphan I., and Lafèvre C., Possibilistic Uncertainty Handling for Answer Set Programming. Annal of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, 47(1-2):139-181 (2006).
  20. Nieves J. C., Modeling arguments and uncertain information ---A non-monotonic reasoning approach. PhD thesis, Software Department (LSI), Technical University of Catalonia, 2008.
  21. Nieves J. C., Osorio M., and Cortés U., Semantics for possibilistic disjunctive programs. In S. Costantini and R. Watson, editors. Paper presented at Answer Set Programming: Advances in Theory and Implementation (ICLP-07 Workshop), 2007, 271-284.
  22. J. C. Nieves, M. Osorio, and U. Cortés., Preferred extensions as stable models. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP), 8(4):527-543 (2008).
  23. Osorio M., Arrazola J. R., and Carballido J. L., Logical Weak Completions of Paraconsistent Logics. Journal of Logic and Computation, doi: 10.1093/log-com/exn015 (2008).
  24. Osorio M. and Carballido J., Brief study of G' 3 logic. Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics, 18(4):475-499 (2008).
  25. Osorio M. and Navarro J. A., Modal logic S52 and FOUR (abstract). In Proceedings of Annual Meeting of the Association for Symbolic Logic, 2003.
  26. Osorio M., Navarro J. A., Arrazola J., and Borja V., Ground nonmonotonic modal logic S5: New results. Journal of Logic and Computation, 15(5):787-813 (2005).
  27. Osorio M., Navarro J. A., Arrazola J. R., and Borja V., Logics with Common Weak Completions. Journal of Logic and Computation, 16(6):867-890 (2006).
  28. Osorio M. and Zepeda C., Update sequences based on minimal generalized pstable models. Paper presented at MICAI 2007: Advances in Artificial Intelligence, 6th Mexican International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 4827 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer, 2007, 283-293.
  29. Osorio M. and. Zepeda C., Pstable theories and preferences. In Electronic Proceedings of the 18 th International Conference on Electronics, Communications, and Computers (CONIELECOMP 2008), March, 2008.
  30. Pearce D., Stable inference as intuitionistic validity. Journal of Logic Programming, 38, 79-91 (1999).
  31. Sakama C. and Inoue K., Paraconsistent stable semantics for extended disjunctive programs. Journal of Logic and Computation, 5:265-285 (1995).
  32. Mauricio Osorio He is a titular professor in the Departamento de Computación, Electrónica y Mecatrónica at the Universidad de las Americas Puebla. He belongs to the Sistema Nacional de Investigadores in Mexico. He is co- author of more than 100 papers in Workshops/Conferences/Journals. He has a google page at: http://osoriomauri.googlepages.com/

Related papers

Non-Monotonic Reasoning with Logic Programming
Luís Pereira

The Journal of Logic and Algebraic Programming, 1993

Our purpose is to exhibit a modular systematic method of representing non{ monotonic reasoning problems with the Well Founded Semantics WFS of extended logic programs augmented with eXplicit negation (WFSX), augmented by its Contradiction Removal Semantics (CRSX) when needed. We apply this semantics, and its contradiction removal semantics counterpart, to represent non-monotonic reasoning problems. We show how to cast in the language of logic programs extended with explicit negation such forms of non-monotonic reasoning as defeasible reasoning, abductive reasoning and hypothetical reasoning and apply them to such di erent domains of knowledge representation as hierarchies and reasoning about actions. We then abstract a modular systematic method of representing non-monotonic problems in a logic programming semantics comprising two forms of negation avoiding some drawbacks of other proposals, with which we relate our work.

View PDFchevron_right
Logic programming for non-monotonic reasoning
Luís Moniz Pereira

Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 1994

Our purpose is to exhibit a modular systematic method of representing nonmonotonic reasoning problems with the Well Founded Semantics of extended logic programs aumented with eXplicit negation (WFSX ), augmented by its Contradiction Removal Semantics (CRSX ) when needed. We show how to cast in the language of such logic programs forms of non-monotonic reasoning like defeasible reasoning and hypothetical reasoning and apply them to di erent domains of knowledge representation, for instance hierarchies and reasoning about actions. We then abstract a modular systematic method of representing non-monotonic problems in logic programming.

View PDFchevron_right
LogAG: An Algebraic Non-Monotonic Logic for Reasoning with Uncertainty
Haythem Osman Ismail

2017

We present a weighted algebraic non-monotonic logic we refer to as Log A G for reasoning with uncertain beliefs. In Log A G, the classical logical formulas could be associated with ordered grades representing measures of uncertainty. The revision of beliefs in Log A G, when contradictions arise, is done according to the grades of the contradictory propositions. Throughout the paper, we present the syntax and semantics of Log A G, extending the classical notion of logical consequence to handle graded propositions. A proof theory for Log A G is thoroughly described, discussing its soundness and completeness. Finally, we demonstrate the utility of Log A G in non-monotonic reasoning and in reasoning about information provided by a chain of sources of varying degrees of trust.

View PDFchevron_right
A unifying view for logic programming with non-monotonic reasoning
Paolo Mancarella

Theoretical Computer Science, 1997

We provide a simple formulation of a framework where some extensions of logic programming with non-monotonic reasoning are treated uniformly, namely, two kinds of negation and abduction. The resulting semantics is purely model-theoretic, and gives meaning to any noncontradictory abductive logic program. Moreover, it embeds and generalizes some existing semantics which deal with negation and abduction. The framework is equipped with a correct top-down proof procedure.

View PDFchevron_right
Semi-Stable Semantics
Martin Caminada

… Models of Argument; Proceedings of COMMA, 2006

In this paper, we examine an argument-based semantics called semi-stable semantics. Semi-stable semantics is quite close to traditional stable semantics in the sense that every stable extension is also a semi-stable extension. One of the advantages of semi-stable semantics is that there exists at least one semi-stable extension. Furthermore, if there also exists at least one stable extension, then the semi-stable extensions coincide with the stable extensions. This, and other properties, make semi-stable semantics an attractive alternative for the more traditional stable semantics, which until now has been widely used in fields such as logic programming and answer set programming.

View PDFchevron_right

Related topics

  • Mathematics
  • Computer Science
  • Philosophy
  • Logic Programming
  • Non-monotonic Logic
  • Semantics (Computer Science)
  • Paraconsistent logic
    • 580 California St., Suite 400
    San Francisco, CA, 94104
    © 2025 Academia. All rights reserved