research-article

On a Flexible Representation for Defeasible Reasoning Variants

Authors:

Abdelraouf Hecham,

Pierre Bisquert,

Madalina CroitoruAuthors Info & Claims

AAMAS '18: Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems

Pages 1123 - 1131

Published: 09 July 2018 Publication History

Abstract

We propose Statement Graphs (SG), a new logical formalism for defeasible reasoning based on argumentation. Using a flexible labeling function, SGs can capture the variants of defeasible reasoning (ambiguity blocking or propagating, with or without team defeat, and circular reasoning). We evaluate our approach with respect to human reasoning and propose a working first order defeasible reasoning tool that, compared to the state of the art, has richer expressivity at no added computational cost. Such tool could be of great practical use in decision making projects such as H2020 NoAW.

References

[1]

Grigoris Antoniou. 2006. Defeasible reasoning: A discussion of some intuitions. International Journal of Intelligent Systems 21, 6 (2006), 545--558.

Digital Library

[2]

Grigoris Antoniou, David Billington, Guido Governatori, Michael J Maher, and Andrew Rock. 2000. A Family of Defeasible Reasoning Logics and its Implementation. In Proceedings of the 14th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 459--463.

Digital Library

[3]

Grigoris Antoniou, David Billington, and Michael J Maher. 1999. On the analysis of regulations using defeasible rules. In Systems Sciences, 1999. HICSS-32. Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Hawaii International Conference on. IEEE, 7--pp.

Digital Library

[4]

Jean-François Baget, Michel Leclère, Marie-Laure Mugnier, and Eric Salvat. 2011. On rules with existential variables: Walking the decidability line. Artificial Intelligence 175, 9--10 (2011), 1620--1654.

Digital Library

[5]

Nick Bassiliades, Grigoris Antoniou, and Ioannis Vlahavas. 2006. A defeasible logic reasoner for the semantic web. International Journal on Semantic Web and Information Systems (IJSWIS) 2, 1 (2006), 1--41.

[6]

David Billington. 1993. Defeasible Logic is Stable. Journal of logic and computation 3, 4 (1993), 379--400.

[7]

David Billington. 2008. Propositional clausal defeasible logic. Logics in Artificial Intelligence (2008), 34--47.

Digital Library

[8]

Gerhard Brewka and Stefan Woltran. 2010. Abstract dialectical frameworks. In Twelfth International Conference on the Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning.

Digital Library

[9]

Ruth M J Byrne. 1989. Suppressing valid inferences with conditionals. Cognition 31, 1 (1989), 61--83.

[10]

Andrea Calì, Georg Gottlob, and Thomas Lukasiewicz. 2012. A general datalogbased framework for tractable query answering over ontologies. Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web 14 (2012), 57--83.

Digital Library

[11]

Emmanuelle-Anna Dietz, Steffen Hölldobler, and ChristophWernhard. 2014. Modeling the suppression task under weak completion and well-founded semantics. Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics 24, 1--2 (2014), 61--85.

[12]

Marlon Dumas, Guido Governatori, Arthur H M Hofstede, and Phillipa Oaks. 2002. A Formal Approach to Negotiating Agents. Electronic commerce research and applications 1, 2 (2002), 193--207.

[13]

Phan Minh Dung. 1995. On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Artificial intelligence 77, 2 (1995), 321--357.

Digital Library

[14]

Alejandro J García and Guillermo R Simari. 2004. Defeasible logic programming: An argumentative approach. Theory and practice of logic programming 4, 1+ 2 (2004), 95--138.

Digital Library

[15]

Diego R Garcia, Alejandro J Garcia, and Guillermo R Simari. 2007. Planning and defeasible reasoning. In Proceedings of the 6th international joint conference on Autonomous agents and multiagent systems. ACM, 856--858.

Digital Library

[16]

Guido Governatori, Micheal J Maher, Grigoris Antoniou, and David Billington. 2004. Argumentation Semantics for Defeasible Logic. Journal of Logic and Computation 14, 5 (2004), 675--702.

Digital Library

[17]

Benjamin N Grosof, Yannis Labrou, and Hoi Y Chan. 1999. A declarative approach to business rules in contracts: courteous logic programs in XML. In Proceedings of the 1st ACM conference on Electronic commerce. ACM, 68--77.

Digital Library

[18]

Abdelraouf Hecham, Madalina Croitoru, and Pierre Bisquert. 2017. Argumentation-Based Defeasible Reasoning For Existential Rules. In Proceedings of the 16th Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems. 1568--1569.

Digital Library

[19]

John F Horty, D S Touretzky, and R H Thomason. 1987. A clash of intuitions: the current state of nonmonotonic multiple inheritance systems. In Proceedings of the Tenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 476--482.

Digital Library

[20]

Michael J Maher, Andrew Rock, Grigoris Antoniou, David Billington, and Tristan Miller. 2001. Efficient defeasible reasoning systems. International Journal on Artificial Intelligence Tools 10, 04 (2001), 483--501.

[21]

Frederick Maier and Donald Nute. 2010. Well-founded semantics for defeasible logic. November 2008 (2010), 243--274.

[22]

David Makinson and Karl Schlechta. 1991. Floating conclusions and zombie paths: two deep difficulties in the âĂídirectly skepticalâĂí approach to defeasible inheritance nets. Artificial intelligence 48, 2 (1991), 199--209.

Digital Library

[23]

Maria Vanina Martinez, Ariel Cristhian David Deagustini, Marcelo A Falappa, and Guillermo Ricardo Simari. 2014. Inconsistency-Tolerant Reasoning in Datalog +- Ontologies via an Argumentative Semantics. In IBERAMIA, Vol. 14. 15--27.

[24]

Leora Morgenstern. 1998. Artificial Intelligence Inheritance comes of age: applying nonmonotonic techniques to problems in industry. Artificial Intelligence 103 (1998), 237--271.

Digital Library

[25]

Donald Nute. 1988. Defeasible reasoning: a philosophical analysis in prolog. Springer.

[26]

Henry Prakken. 2002. Intuitions and the modelling of defeasible reasoning: some case studies. In Ninth Int Workshop on Nonmonotonic Reasoning. Toulouse, 91--99. arXiv:cs/0207031

[27]

Henry Prakken. 2010. An abstract framework for argumentation with structured arguments. Argument and Computation 1, 2 (2010), 93--124.

[28]

Henry Prakken and Giovanni Sartor. 1997. Argument-based extended logic programming with defeasible priorities. Journal of applied non-classical logics 7, 1--2 (1997), 25--75.

[29]

Marco Ragni, Christian Eichhorn, Tanja Bock, Gabriele Kern-Isberner, and Alice Ping Ping Tse. 2017. Formal Nonmonotonic Theories and Properties of Human Defeasible Reasoning. Minds and Machines 27, 1 (2017), 79--117.

Digital Library

[30]

Keith Stenning and Michiel Van Lambalgen. 2012. Human reasoning and cognitive science. MIT Press.

[31]

Guizhen Yang, Michael Kifer, and Chang Zhao. 2003. Flora-2: A Rule-Based Knowledge Representation and Inference Infrastructure for the Semantic Web. On The Move to Meaningful Internet Systems 2003: CoopIS, DOA, and ODBASE (2003), 671--688.

Cited By

Jedwabny MBisquert PCroitoru MElkind EVeloso MAgmon NTaylor M(2019)PAPOWProceedings of the 18th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems10.5555/3306127.3332113(2363-2365)Online publication date: 8-May-2019
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/3306127.3332113

Index Terms

On a Flexible Representation for Defeasible Reasoning Variants
1. Computing methodologies
  1. Artificial intelligence
    1. Knowledge representation and reasoning
      1. Nonmonotonic, default reasoning and belief revision

Recommendations

Argumentation-Based Defeasible Reasoning For Existential Rules
AAMAS '17: Proceedings of the 16th Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems

Logic based argumentation allows for defeasible reasoning over monotonic logics. In this paper, we introduce DEFT, a tool implementing argumentative defeasible reasoning over existential rules. We explain how DEFT overcomes derivation loss and discuss ...
Extending a Defeasible Reasoner with Modal and Deontic Logic Operators
WI-IAT '08: Proceedings of the 2008 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology - Volume 03

Defeasible logic is a non-monotonic formalism that deals with incomplete and conflicting information. Modal logic deals with necessity and possibility, exhibiting defeasibility; thus, it is possible to combine defeasible logic with modal operators. This ...
Propositional defeasible logic has linear complexity

Defeasible logic is a rule-based nonmonotonic logic, with both strict and defeasible rules, and a priority relation on rules. We show that inference in the propositional form of the logic can be performed in linear time. This contrasts markedly with ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

AAMAS '18: Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems

July 2018

2312 pages

General Chairs:
Elisabeth Andre
Augsburg University, Germany
,
Sven Koenig
University of Southern California, USA
,
Program Chairs:
Mehdi Dastani
Utrecht University, Netherlands
,
Gita Sukthankar
University of Central Florida, USA

Sponsors

In-Cooperation

ACM: Association for Computing Machinery

Publisher

International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems

Richland, SC

Publication History

Published: 09 July 2018

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Funding Sources

H2020 CORDIS NoAW

Conference

AAMAS '18

Sponsor:

SIGAI

AAMAS '18: Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems

July 10 - 15, 2018

Stockholm, Sweden

Acceptance Rates

AAMAS '18 Paper Acceptance Rate 149 of 607 submissions, 25%;

Overall Acceptance Rate 1,155 of 5,036 submissions, 23%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

1
Total Citations
View Citations
52
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)5
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1

Reflects downloads up to 20 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Jedwabny MBisquert PCroitoru MElkind EVeloso MAgmon NTaylor M(2019)PAPOWProceedings of the 18th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems10.5555/3306127.3332113(2363-2365)Online publication date: 8-May-2019
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/3306127.3332113

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents