Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

Practical Defeasible Reasoning for Description Logics

View through CrossRef
The preferential approach to nonmonotonic reasoning was consolidated in depth by Krause, Lehmann and Magidor (KLM) for propositional logic in the early 90's. In recent years, there have been efforts to extend their framework to Description Logics (DLs) and a solid (though preliminary) theoretical foundation has already been established towards this aim. Despite this foundation, the generalisation of the propositional framework to DLs is not yet complete and there are multiple proposals for entailment in this context with no formal system for deciding between these. In addition, there are virtually no existing preferential reasoning implementations to speak of for DL-based ontologies. The goals of this PhD are: to place the preferential approach in context w.r.t. the alternative nonmonotonic reasoning proposals, to provide a complete generalisation of the preferential framework of KLM to the DL ALC, provide a formal understanding of the relationships between the multiple proposals for entailment in this context, and finally, to develop an accompanying defeasible reasoning system for DL-based ontologies with performance that is suitable for use in existing ontology development settings.
Title: Practical Defeasible Reasoning for Description Logics
Description:
The preferential approach to nonmonotonic reasoning was consolidated in depth by Krause, Lehmann and Magidor (KLM) for propositional logic in the early 90's.
In recent years, there have been efforts to extend their framework to Description Logics (DLs) and a solid (though preliminary) theoretical foundation has already been established towards this aim.
Despite this foundation, the generalisation of the propositional framework to DLs is not yet complete and there are multiple proposals for entailment in this context with no formal system for deciding between these.
In addition, there are virtually no existing preferential reasoning implementations to speak of for DL-based ontologies.
The goals of this PhD are: to place the preferential approach in context w.
r.
t.
the alternative nonmonotonic reasoning proposals, to provide a complete generalisation of the preferential framework of KLM to the DL ALC, provide a formal understanding of the relationships between the multiple proposals for entailment in this context, and finally, to develop an accompanying defeasible reasoning system for DL-based ontologies with performance that is suitable for use in existing ontology development settings.

Related Results

Logical Challenges in Artificial General Intelligence
Logical Challenges in Artificial General Intelligence
The present thesis pertains to the research area of logic for artificial intelligence (AI), and is motivated by the critical role of automated reasoning in AI, particularly by the ...
Making Quantification Relevant Again —the Case of Defeasible EL⊥
Making Quantification Relevant Again —the Case of Defeasible EL⊥
Defeasible Description Logics (DDLs) extend Description Logics with defeasible concept inclusions. Reasoning in DDLs often employs rational or relevant closure according to the (pr...
Practical Reasoning for Defeasible Description Logics
Practical Reasoning for Defeasible Description Logics
Description Logics (DLs) are a family of logic-based languages for formalisingontologies. They have useful computational properties allowing the developmentof automated reasoning e...
A logic of defeasible argumentation: Constructing arguments in justification logic
A logic of defeasible argumentation: Constructing arguments in justification logic
In the 1980s, Pollock’s work on default reasons started the quest in the AI community for a formal system of defeasible argumentation. The main goal of this paper is to provide a l...
Large-scale Parallel Stratified Defeasible Reasoning
Large-scale Parallel Stratified Defeasible Reasoning
We are recently experiencing an unprecedented explosion of available data coming from the Web, sensors readings, scientific databases, government authorities and more. Such dataset...
A characterization of collective conflict for defeasible argumentation
A characterization of collective conflict for defeasible argumentation
In this paper we define a recursive semantics for warrant in a general defeasible argumentation framework by formalizing a notion of collective (non-binary) conflict among argument...
How Large Language Models Can Affect Clinical Reasoning: A Randomized Clinical Trial
How Large Language Models Can Affect Clinical Reasoning: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Abstract Importance LLMs have encoded a vast array of medical knowledge and are being integrated into clinical settings as deci...

Back to Top