Skip to main content

General Preferential Entaulments as Circumscriptions

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Book cover Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty (ECSQARU 2001)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 2143))

Abstract

A (general) preferential entaulment is defined by a “preference relation” among “states”. States can be either interpretations or sets of interpretations, or “copies” of interpretations or of sets of interpretations, although it is known that the second kind and the fourth one produce the same notion. Circumscription is a special case of the simplest kind, where the states are interpretations. It is already known that a large class of preferential entaulments where the states are copies of interpretations, namely the “cumulative” ones, can be expressed as circumscriptions in a greater vocabulary. We extend this result to the most general kind of general preferential entailment, the additional property requested here is “loop”, a strong kind of “cumulativity”. The greater vocabulary needed here is large, but only a very simple and small set of formulas in this large vocabulary is necessary, which should make the method practically useful.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. H.L Arlo-Costa and SJ. Shapiro, ‘Maps between nonmonotonic and conditional logics.’, in KR’92, pp. 553–564, Cambridge, (1992). Morgan Kaufmann.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Alexander Bochman. An Epistemic Representation of Nonmonotonic Inference. Unpublished manuscript, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Alexander Bochman, ‘Credulous Nonmonotonic Inference’, in IJCau-99, ed., Thomas Dean, pp. 30–35, Stockholm, (August 1999). Morgan Kaufmann.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Tom Costello, ‘The expressive power of circumscription’, Artificial Intelligence, 104(1–2), 313–329, (September 1998).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Johan deKleer and Kurt Konolige, ‘Eliminating the Fixed Predicates from a Circumscription’, Artificial Intelligence, 39(3), 391–398, (July 1989).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Joeri Engelfriet, ‘Non-cumulative reasoning: rules and models’, Journal of Logic and Computation, 10(5), 705–719, (October 2000).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Sarit Kraus, Daniel Lehmann, and Menachem Magidor, ‘Nonmonotonic Reasoning, Preferential Models and Cumulative Logics’, Artificial Intelligence, 44(1–2), 167–207, (July 1990).

    Google Scholar 

  8. John McCarthy, ‘Circumscription-a form of non-monotonic reasoning’, Artificial Intelligence, 13(1–2), 27–39, (April 1980).

    Google Scholar 

  9. John McCarthy, ‘Application of circumscription to formalizing common sense knowledge’, Artificial Intelligence, 28(1), 89–116, (February 1986).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Yves Moinard, ‘Characterizing general preferential entaulments’, in 14th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, ed., Werner Horn, pp. 474–478, IOS Press, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Yves Moinard, ‘Note about cardinality-based circumscription’, Artificial Intelligence, 119(1–2), 259–273, (May 2000).

    Google Scholar 

  12. Yves Moinard and Raymond Rolland, ‘Propositional circumscriptions’, TR INRIA 3538, Rennes, France, (October 1998). http://www.inria.f r/RRRT/RR-3538.html.

  13. Yves Moinard and Raymond Rolland, ‘Preferential entaulments, extensions and reductions of the vocabulary’, TR INRIA-IRISA 3787, Rennes, France, (October 1999).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Yves Moinard and Raymond Rolland, ‘Characterizations of preferential entaulments’, TR INRIA-IRISA 3928, Rennes, France, (April 2000).

    Google Scholar 

  15. Yves Moinard and Raymond Rolland, ‘Smallest Equivalent sets for Finite Propositional Formula Circumscriptions’, in CL-2000, in LNau1861, pp. 897–911, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Donald Perlis and Jack Minker, ‘Completeness results for circumscription’, Artificial Intelligence, 28(1), 29–42, (February 1986).

    Google Scholar 

  17. Ken Satoh, ‘A Probabilistic Interpretation for Lazy Nonmonotonic Reasoning’, in AAau-90, pp. 659–664. MIT Press, (1990).

    Google Scholar 

  18. Yoav Shoham, Reasoning about change, MIT Press, Cambridge, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2001 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Moinard, Y. (2001). General Preferential Entaulments as Circumscriptions. In: Benferhat, S., Besnard, P. (eds) Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty. ECSQARU 2001. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 2143. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44652-4_47

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44652-4_47

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-42464-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-44652-1

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics