Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Sequent calculi for default and autoepistemic logics

  • Contributed Papers
  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Theorem Proving with Analytic Tableaux and Related Methods (TABLEAUX 1996)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 1071))

Abstract

Two sequent calculi, for default logic and autoepistemic logic, will be introduced in this paper. The main goal is improving our prooftheoretic understanding of non-monotonic formalisms. Credulous reasoning will be axiomatized for the first time, and a link will be established between non-monotonic reasoning and the branch of logic devoted to axiomatic rejection methods. In this way, some aspects of non-monotonic reasoning, which were not explicitly axiomatized in previous approaches, will be completely characterized in proof-theoretic terms.

This work has been written while the author was visiting the Institute for Informationssysteme of the Technical University of Wien, supported by the Fonds zur Förderung der wissenschaftlichen Forschung (FWF) through the Lise Meitner grant n. M00066PHY.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. G. Amati, L. Carlucci Aiello, D. Gabbay, F. Pirri. A proof theoretical approach to default reasoning I: tableaux for default logic. To appear in the Journal of Logic and Computation.

    Google Scholar 

  2. C. Bell, A. Nerode, R. Ng and V.S. Subrahmanian. Implementing deductive databases by linear programming. In Proc. of ACM-PODS, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  3. C. Bell, A. Nerode, R. Ng and V.S. Subrahmanian. Implementing stable semantics by linear programming. In L.M. Pereira, A. Nerode (eds.) Logic Programming and Non-monotonic Reasoning: Proc. of the Second Int. Workshop. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachussetts, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  4. R.N. Bol, J.F. Groote. The meaning of negative premises in transition system specifications. In Proc. of ICALP 91, LNCS 510, Springer-Verlag, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  5. A. Bochman. On the relation between default and modal consequence relations. In Proc. of KR'94, 63–74, Morgan Kaufmann, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  6. P.A. Bonatti. Three-valued beliefs and provability, and the semantics of logic programs. PhD Thesis TD-15/93, Dipartimento di Informatica, Università di Pisa, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  7. P.A. Bonatti. Autoepistemic logic programming. Journal of Automated Reasoning, 13:35–67, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  8. P.A. Bonatti. A Gentzen system for non-theorems. Technical Report CD-TR 93/52, Christian Doppler Labor für Expertensysteme, Technische Universität, Wien, September 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  9. X. Caicedo. A formal system for the non-theorems of the propositional calculus. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, 19:147–151, (1978).

    Google Scholar 

  10. R. Dutkiewicz. The method of axiomatic rejection for the intuitionistic propositional calculus. Studia Logica, 48:449–459, (1989).

    Google Scholar 

  11. D. Gabbay. Theoretical foundations for non-monotonic reasoning in expert systems. In K.R. Apt (ed.) Logics and Models of Concurrent Systems. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  12. M.L. Ginsberg. A circumscriptive theorem prover. Artificial Intelligence, 39(2):209–230, (1989).

    Google Scholar 

  13. J.F. Groote. Transition system specifications with negative premises. In Proc. of Concur 90, LNCS 458, Springer-Verlag, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Y.J. Jiang. A first step towards autoepistemic logic programming. Computers and Artificial Intelligence, 10(5):419–441, (1992).

    Google Scholar 

  15. S. Kraus, D. Lehmann and M. Magidor. Nonmonotonic reasoning, preferential models and cumulative logics. Artificial Intelligence, 44(1):167–207, (1990).

    Google Scholar 

  16. H.J. Levesque. All I know: a study in autoepistemic logic. Artificial Intelligence, 42:263–309, (1990).

    Google Scholar 

  17. J. Lukasiewicz. Aristotle's syllogistic from the standpoint of modern formal logic. Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1951.

    Google Scholar 

  18. J. McCarthy. Circumscription: a form of non-monotonic reasoning. Artificial Intelligence, 13:27–39, (1980).

    Google Scholar 

  19. D. Makinson. General theory of cumulative inference. In M. Reinfrank, J. De Kleer, M.L. Ginsberg and E. Sandewall (eds.) Non-monotonic Reasoning, LNAI 346, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1989, 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  20. W. Marek, M. Trusczynski. Computing intersections of autoepistemic expansions. In A. Nerode, W. Marek and V.S. Subrahmanian (eds.) Logic Programming and Non-monotonic Reasoning: Proc. of the First Int. Workshop. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  21. R.C. Moore. Semantical considerations on non-monotonic logic. Artificial Intelligence, 25 (1), (1985).

    Google Scholar 

  22. M.A. Nait Abdallah. An extended framework for default reasoning. In Proc. of FCT'89, LNCS 380, 339–348, Springer-Verlag, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  23. I. Niemela. Decision procedures for autoepistemic logic. Proc. CADE-88, LNCS 310, Springer-Verlag, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  24. N. Olivetti. Tableaux and sequent calculus for minimal entailment. Journal of Automated Reasoning, 9:99–139, (1992).

    Google Scholar 

  25. R. Reiter. A logic for default reasoning. Artificial Intelligence, 13:81–132, (1980).

    Google Scholar 

  26. V. Risch, C.B. Schwind. Tableau-based characterization and theorem proving for default logic. Journal of Automated Reasoning, 13:223–242, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  27. D. Scott. Completeness proofs for the intuitionistic sentential calculus. Summaries of Talks Presented at the Summer Institute for Symbolic Logic (Itaha, Cornell University, July 1957), Princeton: Institute for Defense Analyses, Communications Research Division, 1957, 231–242.

    Google Scholar 

  28. J. Słupecki, G. Bryll, U. Wybraniec-Skardowska. Theory of rejected propositions. Studia Logica, 29:75–115, (1971).

    Google Scholar 

  29. M. Tiomkin. Proving unprovability. In Proc. of LICS'88, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  30. A. Varzi. Complementary sentential logics. Bulletin of the Section of Logic, 19:112–116, (1990).

    Google Scholar 

  31. A. Varzi. Complementary logics for classical propositional languages. Kriterion. Zeitschrift für Philosophie, 4:20–24 (1992).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dipartimento di Informatica, Università di Torino, Italy

    Piero A. Bonatti

Authors
  1. Piero A. Bonatti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

P. Miglioli U. Moscato D. Mundici M. Ornaghi

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1996 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Bonatti, P.A. (1996). Sequent calculi for default and autoepistemic logics. In: Miglioli, P., Moscato, U., Mundici, D., Ornaghi, M. (eds) Theorem Proving with Analytic Tableaux and Related Methods. TABLEAUX 1996. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1071. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-61208-4_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-61208-4_9

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-61208-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-68368-1

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation