Non-situation Calculus and Database Systems
Non-situation calculus is a way to describe dynamic worlds using first order logic, where a theory is written from the viewpoint of a situation (the propositional fluents hold in that situation). We introduced some functions to allow describing propositional fluents that hold in other situations. We define “progression” as a transformation that changes the situation represented by a non-situation calculus. The semantics counterpart of progression, function δ, transforms an interpretation of a non-situation calculus relative to a situation into an interpretation of a non-situation calculus relative to another situation.
We propose using non-situation calculus to study database dynamics by representing a database as a non-situation calculus theory, by representing transactions as changes and by associating the database that results from executing a transaction to the progression of the theory.
KeywordsFree Variable Order Theory Predicate Symbol Unary Predicate Situation Calculus
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.Herbert B. Enderton. A mathematical introduction to logic. Academic Press Inc., 1972.Google Scholar
- 6.Fausto Giunchiglia and Chiara Ghidini. Local model semantics, or contextual reasoning = locality and compatibility”. In Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference, pages 282–289, 1998.Google Scholar
- 11.Edwin P. D. Pednault. ADL and the State-Transition Model of Action. Journal of Logic and Computation, 4(5):465–512, 1994.Google Scholar
- 12.Raymond Reiter. On formalizing database updates: Preliminary report. In Proc. 3rd International Conference on Extending Database Technologies, pages 10–20, 1992.Google Scholar
- 14.Raymond Reiter. The projection problem in the situation calculus: A soundness and completeness result, with an application to database updates. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, 1996.Google Scholar
- 15.Stanley J. Rosenschein. Plan synthesis: A logical perspective. In Proceedings of the. Seventh International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 331–337, 1981.Google Scholar
- 16.Erik Sandewall and Yoav Shoham. Non-monotonic Temporal Reasoning. In Dov Gabbay, C. J. Hogger, and J. A. Robinson, editors, Handbok of Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming, volume 4, pages 439–498. Oxford University Press, 1994.Google Scholar
- 17.Murray Shanahan. Solving the Frame Problem — A Mathematical Investigation of the Common Sense Law of Inertia. The MIT Press, 1997.Google Scholar
- 18.Marianne Winslett. Reasoning about action using a possible models approach. In Proceedings of the Seventh National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 89–93, 1988.Google Scholar