A series of revisions of David Poole’s specificity

In the middle of the 1980s, David Poole introduced a semantic, model-theoretic notion of specificity to the artificial-intelligence community. Since then it has found further applications in non-monotonic reasoning, in particular in defeasible reasoning. Poole tried to approximate the intuitive human concept of specificity, which seems to be essential for reasoning in everyday life with its partial and inconsistent information. His notion, however, turns out to be intricate and problematic, which — as we show — can be overcome to some extent by a closer approximation of the intuitive human concept of specificity. Besides the intuitive advantages of our novel specificity orderings over Poole’s specificity relation in the classical examples of the literature, we also report some hard mathematical facts: Contrary to what was claimed before, we show that Poole’s relation is not transitive in general. The first of our specificity orderings (CP1) captures Poole’s original intuition as close as we could get after the correction of its technical flaws. The second one (CP2) is a variation of CP1 and presents a step toward similar notions that may eventually solve the intractability problem of Poole-style specificity relations. The present means toward deciding our novel specificity relations, however, show only slight improvements over the known ones for Poole’s relation; therefore, we suggest a more efficient workaround for applications in practice.

[1]  Guillermo Ricardo Simari,et al.  Computing Generalized Specificity , 2003, J. Appl. Non Class. Logics.

[2]  Tran Cao Son,et al.  An Argumentation-theoretic Approach to Reasoning with Specificity , 1996, KR.

[3]  Claus-Peter Wirth,et al.  Shallow confluence of conditional term rewriting systems , 2009, J. Symb. Comput..

[4]  Jörg H. Siekmann,et al.  Lectures on Jacques Herbrand as a Logician , 2009, ArXiv.

[5]  Gabriele Kern-Isberner,et al.  A Ranking Semantics for First-Order Conditionals , 2012, ECAI.

[6]  Anthony Hunter,et al.  A logic-based theory of deductive arguments , 2001, Artif. Intell..

[7]  Jürgen Dix,et al.  Relating defeasible and normal logic programming through transformation properties , 2000, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[8]  Theo Tryfonas,et al.  Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications , 2009 .

[9]  Leonard Gillman,et al.  Writing mathematics well , 1987 .

[10]  Claus-Peter Wirth.  HERBRAND’s Fundamental Theorem in the Eyes of JEAN VAN HEIJENOORT , 2012, Logica Universalis.

[11]  David Poole,et al.  On the Comparison of Theories: Preferring the Most Specific Explanation , 1985, IJCAI.

[12]  Michael Gelfond,et al.  Formalization of inheritance reasoning in autoepistemic logic , 1990 .

[13]  Salem Benferhat,et al.  A Coherence-Based Approach to Default Reasoning , 1997, ECSQARU-FAPR.

[14]  V. S. Costa,et al.  Theory and Practice of Logic Programming , 2010 .

[15]  Bernhard Gramlich,et al.  A Constructor-Based Approach to Positive/Negative-Conditional Equational Specifications , 1994, J. Symb. Comput..

[16]  Phan Minh Dung,et al.  On the Acceptability of Arguments and its Fundamental Role in Nonmonotonic Reasoning, Logic Programming and n-Person Games , 1995, Artif. Intell..

[17]  Éric Grégoire,et al.  A Conditional Logic-Based Argumentation Framework , 2013, SUM.

[18]  Jacques Herbrand.  Recherches sur la théorie de la démonstration , 1930 .

[19]  Claus-Peter Wirth.  Positive negative conditional equations: a constructor-based framework for specification and inductive theorem proving , 1997 .

[20]  Frieder Stolzenburg,et al.  David Poole's Specificity Revised , 2014, KR.

[21]  Ulrich Furbach,et al.  An application of automated reasoning in natural language question answering , 2010, AI Commun..

[22]  Dov M. Gabbay,et al.  Handbook of Philosophical Logic , 2002 .

[23]  Lawrence C. Paulson,et al.  Jacques Herbrand: Life, Logic, and Automated Deduction , 2009, Logic from Russell to Church.

[24]  Guillermo Ricardo Simari,et al.  Defeasible logic programming: an argumentative approach , 2003, Theory and Practice of Logic Programming.

[25]  Luc De Raedt,et al.  Proceedings of the 20th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence , 2012 .

[26]  Henry Prakken,et al.  The ASPIC+ framework for structured argumentation: a tutorial , 2014, Argument Comput..

[27]  Claus-Peter Wirth.  Herbrand's Fundamental Theorem - an encyclopedia article , 2015, 1503.01412.

[28]  William F. Clocksin,et al.  Programming in Prolog , 1987, Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

[29]  Simone Frintrop.  Bio-inspired Vision Systems , 2014, KI - Künstliche Intelligenz.

[30]  Henry Prakken,et al.  Logics for Defeasible Argumentation , 2001 .

[31]  Claus-Peter Wirth,et al.  Herbrand's Fundamental Theorem: The Historical Facts and their Streamlining , 2014, ArXiv.

[32]  Guillermo Ricardo Simari,et al.  A Mathematical Treatment of Defeasible Reasoning and its Implementation , 1992, Artif. Intell..

[33]  Ulrich Furbach,et al.  The RatioLog Project: Rational Extensions of Logical Reasoning , 2015, KI - Künstliche Intelligenz.

[34]  Robert A. Kowalski,et al.  Predicate Logic as Programming Language , 1974, IFIP Congress.