Applied Intelligence

, Volume 37, Issue 3, pp 337–356 | Cite as

Critical reasoning: AI for emergency response

  • Stephen PotterEmail author


Effective response to emergencies depends upon the availability of accurate and focused information. The goal of the FireGrid project is to provide an architecture by which the results of computer models of physical phenomena can be made available to decision-makers leading the response to fire emergencies in the built environment. In this paper we discuss the application of a number of AI techniques in the development of FireGrid systems, and include algorithms developed for reasoning about dynamic situations. It is intended that this paper will be of technical interest to those who have to construct agents that are able to reason about the complexities of the real world, and of more general appeal to those interested in the ontological and representational commitments and compromises that underlie this reasoning.


Emergency response Decision support Belief revision 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Alchourròn CE, Gärdenfors P, Makinson D (1985) On the logic of theory change: partial meet contraction and revision functions. J Symb Log 50:510–530 zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Allen JF (1983) Maintaining knowledge about temporal intervals. Commun ACM 26(11):832–843 zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Allen JF (1984) A general model of action and time. Artif Intell 23:2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bennett B, Cohn AG, Wolter F, Zakharyaschev M (2002) Multi-dimensional modal logic as a framework for spatio-temporal reasoning. Appl Intell 17(2):239–251 zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Berry D, Usmani A, Torero J, Tate A, McLaughlin S, Potter S, Trew A, Baxter R, Bull M, Atkinson M (2005) FireGrid: integrated emergency response and fire safety engineering for the future built environment. In: UK e-science programme all hands meeting (AHM-2005) Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bonanno G (2007) Axiomatic characterization of the AGM theory of belief revision in a temporal logic. Artif Intell 171(2–3):144–160 MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chou TSC, Winslett M (1991) The implementation of a model-based belief revision system. ACM SIGART Bull 2(3):28–34. Special issue on implemented knowledge representation and reasoning systems CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    de Kleer J (1986) An assumption-based TMS. Artif Intell 28:127–162 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    dos Santos M, de Brito R, Park H-H, Santos P (2009) Logic-based interpretation of geometrically observable changes occurring in dynamic scenes. Appl Intell 31(2):161–179 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Doyle J (1979) A truth maintenance system. Artif Intell 12:231–272 MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    The FireGrid Consortium,, last accessed: 19th September 2011
  12. 12.
    Forgy C (1982) Rete: a fast algorithm for the many pattern/many object pattern match problem. Artif Intell 19:17–37 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gangemi A, Guarino N, Masolo C, Oltramari A, Schneider L (2002) Sweetening ontologies with DOLCE. In: Gómez-Pérez A, Benjamins VR (eds) Knowledge engineering and knowledge management. Ontologies and the semantic web, 13th international conference, EKAW 2002. Springer, Berlin, pp 166–181 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Han L, Potter S, Beckett G, Pringle G, Welch S, Koo S-H, Wickler G, Usmani A, Torero J, Tate A (2010) FireGrid: an e-infrastructure for next-generation emergency response support. J Parallel Distrib Comput 70:1128–1141 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    HM Fire Service Inspectorate (2002) In: Fire service manual, volume 2: fire service operations, incident command. HM fire services inspectorate publications. The Stationary Office, London Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Katsuno H, Mendelzon AO (1991) On the difference between updating a knowledge base and revising it. In: Proc 2nd int conf on the principles of knowledge representation and reasoning (KR’91). Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, pp 387–394 Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Katsuno H, Mendelzon AO (1991) Propositional knowledge base revision and minimal change. Artif Intell 52:263–294 MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Le Berre D (2001) ADS: a unified computational framework for some consistency and abductive-based propsositional reasoning. In: Proc 2nd Australasian workshop on computational logic (AWCL01), Gold Coast, Australia, 31 Jan–1 Feb 2001 Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Liberatore P, Schaerf M (2000) BReLS: A system for the integration of knowledge bases. In: Proc 7th int conf on principles of knowledge representation and reasoning (KR 2000). Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, pp 145–152 Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Potter S, Wickler G (2008) Model-based query systems for emergency response. In: Fiedrich F, Van de Walle B (eds) Proc 5th int conf on information systems for crisis response and management (ISCRAM), Washington DC, USA, May 2008 Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rao AS, Foo NY (1989) Minimal change and maximal coherence: a basis for belief revision and reasoning about actions. In: Proc 11th int joint conf on artificial intelligence (IJCAI-89), pp 966–971 Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sripada SM (1993) A temporal approach to belief revision in knowledge bases. In: Proc 9th IEEE conf on artificial intelligence for applications (CAIA’93), Orlando, Florida, March 1993 Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Tate A (2000) Intelligible AI planning. In: Proceedings of ES2000, 20th BCS special group on expert systems international conference on knowledge based systems and applied artificial intelligence. Springer, Berlin, pp 3–16 Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Tate A (2003) <I-N-C-A>: an ontology for mixed-initiative synthesis tasks. In: Proceedings of the workshop on mixed-initiative intelligent systems (MIIS) at the international joint conference on artificial intelligence (IJCAI-03), Acapulco, Mexico, August 2003 Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Upadhyay R, Pringle G, Beckett G, Potter S, Han L, Welch S, Usmani A, Torero J (2008) An architecture for an integrated fire emergency response system for the built environment. In: Proc 9th IAFSS international symposium on fire safety science, Karlsruhe, Germany, September 2008 Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wickler G, Potter S (2009) Information-gathering: from sensor data to decision support in three simple steps. Intell Decis Technol 3:3–17 Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of InformaticsThe University of EdinburghEdinburghUK

Personalised recommendations