Handling Defeasibilities in Action Domains
Yan Zhang

TL;DR
This paper introduces a set of three prioritized logic programming languages designed to effectively handle different types of defeasible information in reasoning about actions and change, addressing conflicts and interference among defeasible rules.
Contribution
It develops three new action languages, {\
Findings
The languages handle defeasible constraints, observations, and effects.
They provide a semantics based on transition systems and prioritized logic programs.
The approach improves reasoning accuracy in complex action domains.
Abstract
Representing defeasibility is an important issue in common sense reasoning. In reasoning about action and change, this issue becomes more difficult because domain and action related defeasible information may conflict with general inertia rules. Furthermore, different types of defeasible information may also interfere with each other during the reasoning. In this paper, we develop a prioritized logic programming approach to handle defeasibilities in reasoning about action. In particular, we propose three action languages {\cal AT}^{0}, {\cal AT}^{1} and {\cal AT}^{2} which handle three types of defeasibilities in action domains named defeasible constraints, defeasible observations and actions with defeasible and abnormal effects respectively. Each language with a higher superscript can be viewed as an extension of the language with a lower superscript. These action languages inherit the…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsLogic, Reasoning, and Knowledge · Multi-Agent Systems and Negotiation · Constraint Satisfaction and Optimization
