Generating cooperative question-responses by means of erotetic search scenarios

Łupkowski, Paweł; Leszczyńska-Jasion, Dorota

doi:10.12775/llp.2014.017

Cited by 7 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 12 publications

(16 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…corresponding to each successful erotetic move. As algorithms for generating these scenarios have already been implemented (Bolotov, Łupkowski, & Urbański, 2006;Chlebowski, Komosinski, & Kups, 2017;Łupkowski & Leszczyńska-Jasion, 2015), there is reason to think that implementing SC ? is both feasible and complementary of the systems for erotetic search scenarios.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Defeasible Calculus for Zetetic Agents

Millson

2020

LLP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study of defeasible reasoning unites epistemologists with those working in AI, in part, because both are interested in epistemic rationality. While it is traditionally thought to govern the formation and (with)holding of beliefs, epistemic rationality may also apply to the interrogative attitudes associated with our core epistemic practice of inquiry, such as wondering, investigating, and curiosity. Since generally intelligent systems should be capable of rational inquiry, AI researchers have a natural interest in the norms that govern interrogative attitudes. Following its recent coinage, we use the term "zetetic" to refer to the properties and norms associated with the capacity to inquire. In this paper, we argue that zetetic norms can be modeled via defeasible inferences to and from questions-a.k.a erotetic inferences-in a manner similar to the way norms of epistemic rationality are represented by defeasible inference rules. We offer a sequent calculus that accommodates the unique features of "erotetic defeat" and that exhibits the computational properties needed to inform the design of zetetic agents. The calculus presented here is an improved version of the one presented in Millson (2019), extended to cover a new class of defeasible erotetic inferences.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Defeasible Calculus for Zetetic Agents

Millson

2020

LLP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[17]), including man-machine dialogue interactions (cf. [16,18]). E-scenarios are linked with proof theory as well (see [22,28]).…”

Section: Examples and Commentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Generalized Entailments

Wiśniewski

2017

LLP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.A semantic relation between a family of sets of formulas and a set of formulas, dubbed generalized entailment, and its subrelation, called constructive generalized entailment, are defined and examined. Entailment construed in the usual way and multiple-conclusion entailment can be viewed as special cases of generalized entailment. The concept of constructive generalized entailment, in turn, enables an explication of some often used notion of interrogative entailment, and coincides with inquisitive entailment at the propositional level. Some interconnections between constructive generalized entailment and Inferential Erotetic Logic are also analysed.Keywords: entailment; families of sets; logic of questions Basic intuitionsAs for logic, entailment is most often conceived of as a relation between a set of well-formed formulas (wffs for short) on the one hand, and a single wff on the other. Entailment ensures transmission of truth: a wff A entailed by a set of wffs X must be true if only all the wffs in X are true. What 'must' means here depends on a logic under consideration, and similarly for 'truth.' The transmission of truth principle falls under the general schema: where A stands, depending on a case, for: 'valuation' (of an appropriate kind), 'model', 'intended model', 'world of a model', and so forth.Entailment understood in the standard way exhibits a kind of asymmetry: what is entailed is a single wff, while what is entailing it is a set of wffs. If, for some reasons, you prefer symmetry over the lack of it,

show abstract

“…See also [14] for the connection between e-scenarios and proof theory. E-scenarios were also used as a basis for the procedure of generating cooperative responses useful for the interfaces of information systems  see [9] and [8]. The procedure presented in [9] was implemented in Prolog and is available for download.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…E-scenarios were also used as a basis for the procedure of generating cooperative responses useful for the interfaces of information systems  see [9] and [8]. The procedure presented in [9] was implemented in Prolog and is available for download. 1 This paper is structured as follows: Similarities and differences between our approach and the already existing frameworks for agents using questioning agendas are discussed in Section 1.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Epistemic Erotetic Search Scenarios

Łupkowski

Majer

Peliš

et al. 2018

LLP

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this paper is to introduce erotetic search scenarios known from Inferential Erotetic Logic by using the framework of epistemic erotetic logic. The key notions used in this system are those of askability and epistemic erotetic implication. Scenarios are supposed to represent all rational strategies of an agent solving the problem posed by the initial question where the interaction with an external information source is seen as a series of updates of the agent's knowledge.

show abstract

Generating cooperative question-responses by means of erotetic search scenarios

Cited by 7 publications

References 12 publications

A Defeasible Calculus for Zetetic Agents

A Defeasible Calculus for Zetetic Agents

Generalized Entailments

Epistemic Erotetic Search Scenarios

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About