Abstract
The overall goal of this research program is a construction of a paraconsistent model of agents’ communication, comprising two building blocks: speaking about facts and speaking about reasoning rules. To construct complex dialogues, such as persuasion, deliberation, information seeking, negotiation or inquiry, the speech acts theory provides the necessary building material. This paper extends the implementation of the speech act assert in the paraconsistent framework, presented in our previous paper, by providing means for agents to perceive and learn not only facts, but also rules. To this end the admissibility criterion for a rule to be accepted has been defined and the Algorithm for Perceiving Assertions About Rules has been proposed. A natural four-valued model of interaction yields multiple new cognitive situations. Epistemic profiles encode the way agents reason, and therefore also deal with inconsistent or lacking information. Communicative relations in turn comprise various aspects of communication and allow for the fine-tuning of applications.
The particular choice of a rule-based, Datalog ¬¬-like query language 4QL as a four-valued implementation framework ensures that, in contrast to the standard two-valued approaches, tractability of the model is maintained.
Supported by the Polish National Science Centre grants 2011/01/B/ST6/02769 and CORE 6505/B/T02/2011/40.
Access provided by Autonomous University of Puebla. Download to read the full chapter text
Chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
References
Atkinson, K., Bench-Capon, T., McBurney, P.: Computational representation of practical argument. Synthese 152, 157–206 (2005)
Austin, J.L.: How to Do Things with Words, 2nd edn. Clarendon Press, Oxford (1975) Edited by J. O. Urmson, M. Sbisa
de Amo, S., Pais, M.: A paraconsistent logic approach for querying inconsistent databases. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning 46, 366–386 (2007)
Dignum, F., Dunin-Kęplicz, B., Verbrugge, R.: Creating collective intention through dialogue. Logic Journal of the IGPL 9, 145–158 (2001)
Dunin-Kęplicz, B., Strachocka, A., Szałas, A., Verbrugge, R.: Perceiving Speech Acts under Incomplete and Inconsistent Information. In: KES AMSTA. Frontiers of Artificial Intelligence and Applications, vol. 252, pp. 255–264. IOS Press (2013)
Dunin-Kęplicz, B., Szałas, A.: Epistemic profiles and belief structures. In: Jezic, G., Kusek, M., Nguyen, N.-T., Howlett, R.J., Jain, L.C. (eds.) KES-AMSTA 2012. LNCS, vol. 7327, pp. 360–369. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)
Walther, D., Lutz, C., Wolter, F., Wooldridge, M.: ATL satisfiability is indeed EXPTIME-complete. Journal of Logic and Computation 16(6), 765–787 (2006)
Dziubiński, M., Verbrugge, R., Dunin-Kęplicz, B.: Complexity issues in multiagent logics. Fundamenta Informaticae 75(1-4), 239–262 (2007)
Fages, F.: Consistency of Clark’s completion and existence of stable models. Methods of Logic in Computer Science 1, 51–60 (1994)
FIPA (2002), http://www.fipa.org/
Małuszyński, J., Szałas, A.: Living with Inconsistency and Taming Nonmonotonicity. In: de Moor, O., Gottlob, G., Furche, T., Sellers, A. (eds.) Datalog 2010. LNCS, vol. 6702, pp. 384–398. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)
Małuszyński, J., Szałas, A.: Partiality and Inconsistency in Agents’ Belief Bases. In: KES-AMSTA. Frontiers of Artificial Intelligence and Applications, vol. 252, pp. 3–17. IOS Press (2013)
Mascardi, V., Demergasso, D., Ancona, D.: Languages for programming BDI-style agents: an overview. In: Corradini, F., De Paoli, F., Merelli, E., Omicini, A. (eds.) WOA 2005 - Workshop From Objects to Agents, pp. 9–15 (2005)
Parsons, S., McBurney, P.: Argumentation-based dialogues for agent coordination. Group Decision and Negotiation 12, 415–439 (2003)
Prakken, H.: Formal systems for persuasion dialogue. The Knowledge Engineering Review 21(2), 163–188 (2006)
Searle, J.R.: Speech Acts. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1969)
Vitória, A., Małuszyński, J., Szałas, A.: Modeling and reasoning with paraconsistent rough sets. Fundamenta Informaticae 97(4), 405–438 (2009)
Walton, D., Krabbe, E.: Commitment in Dialogue: Basic Concepts of Interpersonal Reasoning. State University of New York Press, Albany (1995)
Cohen, P.R., Levesque, H.J.: Rational interaction as the basis for communication. Technical Report 433, SRI International, Menlo Park, CA (1988)
Kaiser, M., Dillmann, R., Rogalla, O.: Communication as the basis for learning in multi-agent systems. In: ECAI 1996 Workshop on Learning in Distributed AI Systems (1996)
Paglieri, F., Castelfranchi, C.: Revising beliefs through arguments: Bridging the gap between argumentation and belief revision in MAS. In: Rahwan, I., Moraïtis, P., Reed, C. (eds.) ArgMAS 2004. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3366, pp. 78–94. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)
Costantini, S.: Learning by knowledge exchange in logical agents. In: WOA 2005, Dagli (2005)
Mcburney, P., Parsons, S.: Tenacious Tortoises: A formalism for argument over rules of inference. In: Computational Dialectics (ECAI 2000 Workshop) (2000)
Singh, M.: A semantics for speech acts. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, pp. 47–71. Springer, Netherlands (1993) Print ISSN: 1012-2443
Linder, B., Hoek, W., Meyer, J.-J. C.: Actions that make you change your mind. In: KI 1995: Advances in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 98, pp. 185–196 (1995)
Prakken, H.: Modelling Reasoning about Evidence in Legal Procedure. In: Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, pp. 119–128 (2001)
Bench-Capon, T.J.M., Prakken, H.: Using Argument Schemes for Hypothetical Reasoning in Law. Artificial Intelligence and Law 18(2), 153–174 (2010)
Gabbay, D., Hunter, A.: Making Inconsistency Respectable: A Logical Framework for Inconsistency in Reasoning, Part I - A Position Paper. In: Jorrand, P., Kelemen, J. (eds.) FAIR 1991. LNCS, vol. 535, pp. 19–32. Springer, Heidelberg (1991)
Winslett, M.: Updating logical databases. Cambridge University Press (1990)
van Harmelen, F., Lifschitz, V., Porter, B.: Handbook of Knowledge Representation. Elsevier Science (2007)
Alferes, J.J., Leite, J.A., Pereira, L.M., Przymusinska, H., Przymusinski, T.C.: Dynamic Logic Programming. In: Procs. of the Sixth International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, Trento, Italy, pp. 98–109 (1998)
Alferes, J.J., Brogi, A., Leite, J., Moniz Pereira, L.: Evolving Logic Programs. In: Flesca, S., Greco, S., Leone, N., Ianni, G. (eds.) JELIA 2002. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2424, pp. 50–61. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)
Béziau, J.-Y., Carnielli, W.A., Gabbay, D.M.: Handbook of paraconsistency. College publications (2007)
Walton, D., Reed, C., Macagno, F.: Argumentation Schemes. Cambridge University Press (2008)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Dunin-Kęplicz, B., Strachocka, A. (2013). Perceiving Rules under Incomplete and Inconsistent Information. In: Leite, J., Son, T.C., Torroni, P., van der Torre, L., Woltran, S. (eds) Computational Logic in Multi-Agent Systems. CLIMA 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 8143. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40624-9_16
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40624-9_16
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-40623-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-40624-9
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)