Cautious Backtracking in Truth Maintenance Systems

  • Catholijn Jonker
Part of the Synthese Library book series (SYLI, volume 229)


Truth Maintenance is one of the areas in which backtracking as a method for belief revision is used. A Truth Maintenance System (TMS) is a system that maintains a coherent and consistent interpretation for a problem solver. The problem solver supplies the TMS with propositional information concerning its reasoning process. This information is called a dependency theory and consists of pieces of information called nodes and reasons for belief in nodes, called justifications, and constraints on the interpretation. A constraint expresses that some beliefs are incompatible. In a changeable environment the system must be able to revise its interpretation whenever this interpretation contradicts new information. To resolve contradictions belief revision is necessary.


Logic Program Problem Solver Stable Model Belief Revision Dependency Theory 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    J. Doyle. A truth maintenance system. Artificial Intelligence, 12, 1979, pp. 231–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ch. Elkan. Logical characterizations of Nonmonotonic TMSs. In A. Kreczmar and G. Mirkowska (eds.), Foundations of Computer Science 1989, Springer-Heidelberg, 1989, pp. 218–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    P. Gärdenfors. Knowledge in Flux. MIT Press, Cambridge, 1988.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    A. van Gelder. The Alternating Fixpoint of Logic Programs with Negation. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, ACM SIGACT-SIGMOD, 1989, pp. 1–10.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    A. van Gelder, K. Ross, J. Schlipf. Unfounded Sets and Well-Founded Semantics for General Logic Programs. In Proceedings of the Seventh ACM Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, 1988, pp. 221–230.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    M. Gelfond, V. Lifschitz. The Stable Model Semantics For Logic Programming. In R. Kowalski and K. Bowen (eds.), Fifth Int’l Conf. Symposium on Logic Programming, Seattle, 1988, pp. 1070–1080.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    L. Giordano, A. Martelli. Generalized Stable Models, Truth Maintenance and Conflict Resolution. In D. Warren and P. Szeredi (eds.), Proc. of the 7th International Conference on Logic Programming, 1990, pp. 427–441.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    J. Goodwin. An Improved Algorithm for Non-Monotonic Dependency Net Update. LITH-MAT-R-82–83, Linkoeping University 1982.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    J. Goodwin. A Theory and System for Non-Monotonic Reasoning. Linkoeping Studies in Science and Technology, Dissertations no 165, 1987.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    C.M. Jonker. On the Semantics of Conflict Resolution in Truth Maintenance Systems. Logic Group Preprint Series, No. 65, March 1991, Department of Philosophy, University of Utrecht.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    H. Przymusinska, T. Przymusinski. Semantic Issues in Deductive Databases and Logic Programs. In R. B. Banerji (ed.), Formal Techniques in Artificial Intelligence, A Source-book, Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1990, pp. 321–367.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    T. Przymusinski. Every Logic Program Has a Natural Stratification And an Iterated Least Fixed Point Model. In Eighth ACM Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, 1989, pp. 11–21.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    T. Przymusinski. Non-Monotonic Reasoning vs. Logic Programming: A New Perspective. In D. Partridge and Y. Wilks (eds.), The Foundations of Artificial Intelligence. A source-book. Cambridge University Press, London, 1990, pp. 49–71.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    K. Ross. The Well Founded Semantics for Disjunctive Logic Programs. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Deductive and Object Oriented Databases, 1989, pp. 352–369.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    C. Witteveen. Partial Semantics for Truth Maintenance. In J.W. van Eijck (ed.), Logics in AI, LNAI, Springer Heidelberg, 1990.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Catholijn Jonker
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and Department of PhilosophyUtrecht UniversityThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations