Alternating Fixpoint Theory for Logic Programs with Priority

Wang, Kewen; Zhou, Lizhu; Lin, Fangzhen

doi:10.1007/3-540-44957-4_11

Cited by 35 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[12] set out to unify approaches to defeasible reasoning. Specifically, they present an adaptable meta-interpreter, which can be made to simulate the approaches described in [6,33] among others.…”

Section: Comparison With Other Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These problems have been stimulating search for higher-abstraction forms of logic programing, which equip the knowledge engineer with frameworks and tools that are closer to the way humans tend to think of and describe the various application domains. These frameworks include object-oriented and higher-order concepts [21,7], inheritance and exceptions [32,22,34], and defeasible reasoning [3,5,6,10,11,12,17,19,25,27,31,33,35].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Logic Programming with Defaults and Argumentation Theories

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. We define logic programs with defaults and argumentation theories, a new framework that unifies most of the earlier proposals for defeasible reasoning in logic programming. We present a model-theoretic semantics and study its reducibility and well-behavior properties. We use the framework as an elegant and flexible foundation to extend and improve upon Generalized Courteous Logic Programs (GCLP) [19]-one of the popular forms of defeasible reasoning. The extensions include higherorder and object-oriented features of Hilog and F-Logic [7,21]. The improvements include much simpler, incremental reasoning algorithms and more intuitive behavior. The framework and its Courteous family instantiation were implemented as an extension to the FLORA-2 system.

show abstract

Section: Comparison With Other Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Logic Programming with Defaults and Argumentation Theories

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Every answer set preferred in the sense of [ Delgrande et al,2003 ] is also preferred by [ Wang et al,2000;Schaub and Wang,2001 ] .…”

Section: Logic Programs With Preferencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…As a result, this approach admits the capturing of different preference semantics for extended logic programs; in particular, those introduced by Brewka and Eiter [ 1999 ] , Delgrande et al [ 2003 ] , and Schaub and Wang [ 2001 ] . Zhang and Foo [ 1997a ] present an operational semantics for ordered logic programs based on an iterative reduction to standard programs. The approach admits both static and dynamic preferences, in which the dynamic case is reduced to the static one.…”

Section: Logic Programs With Preferencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Priority logic, due to You, Wang, and Yuan [ 2001 ] , provides a form of argumentation-based framework with preference, where a theory (or a program) is a pair consisting of a rule set and a priority relation among rules. If a rule δ has higher priority over another rule δ , then the application of δ will block the application of δ .…”

Section: Other Approaches To Preferencementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Classification and Survey of Preference Handling Approaches in Nonmonotonic Reasoning

Delgrande

Schaub

Tompits

et al. 2004

Computational Intelligence

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, there has been a large amount of disparate work concerning the representation and reasoning with qualitative preferential information by means of approaches to nonmonotonic reasoning. Given the variety of underlying systems, assumptions, motivations, and intuitions, it is difficult to compare or relate one approach with another. Here, we present an overview and classification for approaches to dealing with preference. A set of criteria for classifying approaches is given, followed by a set of desiderata that an approach might be expected to satisfy. A comprehensive set of approaches is subsequently given and classified with respect to these sets of underlying principles.

show abstract