Abstract
Defeasible reasoning is a simple but e.cient approach to nonmonotonic reasoning that has recently attracted considerable interest and that has found various applications. Defeasible logic and its variants are an important family of defeasible reasoning methods. So far no relationship has been established between defeasible logic and mainstream nonmonotonic reasoning approaches.
In this paper we establish close links to known semantics of extended logic programs. In particular, we give a translation of a defeasible theory D into a program P(D). We show that under a condition of decisiveness, the defeasible consequences of D correspond exactly to the sceptical conclusions of P(D) under the answer set semantics. Without decisiveness, the result holds only in one direction (all defeasible consequences of D are included in all answer sets of P(D)). If we wish a complete embedding for the general case, we need to use the Kunen semantics of P(D), instead.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
G. Antoniou, D. Billington and M.J. Maher. On the analysis of regulations using defeasible rules. In Proc. 32nd Hawaii International Conference on Systems Science, 1999.
G. Antoniou, D. Billington and M. Maher. Defeasible Logic versus Logic Programming without Negation as Failure. Journal of Logic Programming 41,1 (2000): 45–57.
G. Antoniou, M.J. Maher and D. Billington. Defeasible Logic versus Logic Programming without Negation as Failure, Journal of Logic Programming, 42 (2000): 47–57.
G. Antoniou, D. Billington, G. Governatori and M.J. Maher. A flexible framework for defeasible logics. In Proc. 17th American National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-2000), 405–410.
G. Antoniou, D. Billington, G. Governatori and M.J. Maher. Representation results for defeasible logic. ACM Transactions on Computational Logic 2 (2001): 255–287
D. Billington. Defeasible Logic is Stable. Journal of Logic and Computation 3 (1993): 370–400.
J.P. Delgrande, T Schaub and H. Tompits. Logic Programs with Compiled Preferences. In Proc. ECAI’2000, 464–468.
M. Gelfond and V. Lifschitz. The stable model semantics for logic programming. In Proc. International Conference on Logic Programming, MIT Press 1988, 1070–1080.
M. Gelfond and V. Lifschitz. Classical negation in logic programs and deductive databases. New Generation Computing 9 (1991): 365–385.
G. Governatori, A. ter Hofstede and P. Oaks. Defeasible Logic for Automated Negotiation. In Proc. Fifth CollECTeR Conference on Electronic Commerce, Brisbane 2000.
B.N. Grosof. Prioritized conflict handling for logic programs. In Proc. International Logic Programming Symposium, MIT Press 1997, 197–211.
B.N. Grosof, Y. Labrou and H.Y. Chan. A Declarative Approach to Business Rules in Contracts: Courteous Logic Programs in XML. In Proc. 1st ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce (EC-99), ACM Press 1999.
H.A. Kautz and B. Selman. Hard problems for simple default theories. Artificial Intelligence 28 (1991): 243–279.
K. Kunen. Negation in Logic Programming. Journal of Logic Programming 4 (1987): 289–308.
M.J. Maher, A. Rock, G. Antoniou, D. Billington and T. Miller. Efficient Defeasible Reasoning Systems. In Proc. 12th IEEE International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence (ICTAI 2000), IEEE 2000, 384–392.
M.J. Maher. A Denotational Semantics for Defeasible Logic. In Proc. First International Conference on Computational Logic, LNAI1861, Springer, 2000, 209–222.
M.J. Maher. Propositional Defeasible Logic has Linear Complexity. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming, to appear.
V. Marek and M. Truszczynski. Nonmonotonic Logic. Springer 1993.
L. Morgenstern. Inheritance Comes of Age: Applying Nonmonotonic Techniques to Problems in Industry. ArtiFIcial Intelligence, 103 (1998): 1–34.
D. Nute. Defeasible Logic. In D.M. Gabbay, C.J. Hogger and J.A. Robinson (eds.): Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming Vol. 3, Oxford University Press 1994, 353–395.
H. Prakken. Logical Tools for Modelling Legal Argument: A Study of Defeasible Reasoning in Law. Kluwer Academic Publishers 1997.
D.M. Reeves, B.N. Grosof, M.P. Wellman, and H.Y. Chan. Towards a Declarative Language for Negotiating Executable Contracts, Proceedings of the AAAI-99 Workshop on Artificial Intelligence in Electronic Commerce (AIEC-99), AAAI Press / MIT Press, 1999.
R. Reiter. A Logic for Default Reasoning. Artificial Intelligence 13(1980): 81–132.
D.D. Touretzky, J.F. Horty and R.H. Thomason. A Clash of Intuitions: The Current State of Nonmonotonic Multiple Inheritance Systems. In Proc. IJCAI-87, Morgan Kaufmann 1987, 476–482.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2002 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Antoniou, G. (2002). Relating Defeasible Logic to Extended Logic Programs. In: Vlahavas, I.P., Spyropoulos, C.D. (eds) Methods and Applications of Artificial Intelligence. SETN 2002. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 2308. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-46014-4_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-46014-4_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-43472-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-46014-5
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive