Abstract
The automation of reasoning as deduction in logical theories is well established. Such logical theories are usually inherited from the literature or are built manually for a particular reasoning task. They are then regarded as fixed. We will argue that they should be regarded as fluid.
-
1
As Pólya and others have argued, appropriate representation is the key to successful problem solving [Pólya, 1945]. It follows that a successful problem solver must be able to choose or construct the representation best suited to solving the current problem. Some of the most seminal episodes in human problem solving required radical representational change.
-
1
Automated agents use logical theories called ontologies. For different agents to communicate they must align their ontologies. When a large, diverse and evolving community of autonomous agents are continually engaged in online negotiations, it is not practical to manually pre-align the ontologies of all agent pairs - it must be done dynamically and automatically.
-
1
Persistent agents must be able to cope with a changing world and changing goals. This requires evolving their ontologies as their problem solving task evolves. The W3C call this ontology evolution.
The research reported in this paper was supported by EPSRC grant EP/E005713/1. It will soon be supported by EPSRC grant EP/G000700/1 I would like to thank Michael Chan, Lucas Dixon and Fiona McNeill for their feedback on this paper and their contributions to the research referred to in it.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Bundy, A., Chan, M.: Towards ontology evolution in physics. In: Hodges, W. (ed.) Procs. Wollic 2008. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)
Bundy, A.: A science of reasoning. In: Lassez, J.-L., Plotkin, G. (eds.) Computational Logic: Essays in Honor of Alan Robinson, pp. 178–198. MIT Press, Cambridge (1991)
Bundy, A.: Where’s my stuff? An ontology repair plan. In: Ahrendt, W., Baumgartner, P., de Nivelle, H. (eds.) Proceedings of the Workshop on Disproving - Non-Theorems, Non-Validity, Non-Provability, Bremen, Germany, pp. 2–12 (July 2007), http://www.cs.chalmers.se/~ahrendt/CADE07-ws-disproving/
McNeill, F., Bundy, A.: Dynamic, automatic, first-order ontology repair by diagnosis of failed plan execution. IJSWIS 3(3), 1–35 (2007); Special issue on ontology matching
Miller, D., Nadathur, G.: An overview of λProlog. In: Bowen, R. (ed.) Proceedings of the Fifth International Logic Programming Conference/ Fifth Symposium on Logic Programming. MIT Press, Cambridge (1988)
Pólya, G.: How to Solve It. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1945)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2008 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Bundy, A. (2008). Automating Signature Evolution in Logical Theories. In: Autexier, S., Campbell, J., Rubio, J., Sorge, V., Suzuki, M., Wiedijk, F. (eds) Intelligent Computer Mathematics. CICM 2008. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 5144. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-85110-3_29
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-85110-3_29
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-85109-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-85110-3
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)