Temporal semantics of meta-level architectures for dynamic control of reasoning

  • Jan Treur
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 883)


Meta-level architectures for dynamic control of reasoning processes are quite powerful. In the literature many applications in reasoning systems modelling complex tasks are described, usually in a procedural manner. In this paper we present a declarative framework based on temporal (partial) logic that enables one to describe the dynamics of reasoning behaviour by temporal models. Using these models the semantics of the behaviour of the whole (meta-level) reasoning system can be described by a set of (intended) temporal models.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    J.F.A.K. van Benthem, The logic of time: a model-theoretic investigation into the varieties of temporal ontology and temporal discource, Reidel, Dordrecht, 1983.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    S. Blamey, Partial Logic, in: D. Gabbay and F. Guenthner (eds.), Handbook of Philosophical Logic, Vol. III, 1–70, Reidel, Dordrecht, 1986.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    K. Bowen and R. Kowalski, Amalgamating language and meta-language in logic programming. In: K. Clark, S. Tarnlund (eds.), Logic programming. Academic Press, 1982.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    H.A. Brumsen, J.H.M. Pannekeet and J. Treur, A compositional knowledge-based architecture modelling process aspects of design tasks, Proc. 12th Int. Conf. on AI, Expert systems and Natural Language, Avignon'92 (Vol. 1), 1992, pp. 283–294.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    W.J. Clancey and C. Bock, Representing control knowledge as abstract tasks and metarules, in: Bolc, Coombs (eds.), Expert System Applications, 1988.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    R. Davis, Metarules: reasoning about control, Artificial Intelligence 15 (1980), pp. 179–222.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    T. Fernando, Transition systems and dynamic semantics, Proc. JELIA'92 Workshop on Logic and AI, Berlin, 1992.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    P.A. Geelen and W. Kowalczyk, A knowledge-based system for the routing of international blank payment orders, Proc. 12th Int. Conf. on AI, Expert systems and Natural Language, Avignon-92 (Vol. 2), 1992, pp. 669–677.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    E. Giunchiglia, P. Traverso and F. Giunchiglia, Multi-context Systems as a Specification framework for Complex Reasoning Systems, In: [24], 1993, pp. 45–72.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    R. Goldblatt, Logics of Time and Computation. CSLI Lecture Notes, Vol. 7. 1987, Center for the Study of Language and Information.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    J.A.W. Kamp, A theory of truth and semantic representation, In: Formal methods in the study of language. Mathematical Centre Tracts 135, Amsterdam, 1981.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    P.H.G. van Langen and J. Treur, Representing world situations and information states by many-sorted partial models, Report PE8904, University of Amsterdam, Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, 1989.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    T. Langholm, Partiality, Truth and Persistance, CSLI Lecture Notes No. 15, Stanford University, Stanford, 1988.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    I.A. van Langevelde, A.W. Philipsen, J. Treur, Formal specification of compositional architectures, In: B. Neumann (ed.), Proc. 10th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, ECAI'92, Wiley and Sons, 1992, pp. 272–276.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    J.W. Lloyd, Foundations of logic programming, Springer Verlag, 1984.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    P. Maes, D. Nardi (eds), Meta-level architectures and reflection, Elsevier Science Publishers, 1988.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Y.H. Tan and J. Treur, A bi-modular approach to nonmonotonic reasoning, In: De Glas, M., Gabbay, D. (eds.), Proc. World Congress on Fundamentals of Artificial Intelligence, WOCFAI'91, 1991, pp. 461–476.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Y.H. Tan and J. Treur, Constructive default logic and the control of defeasible reasoning, In: B. Neumann (ed.), Proc. 10th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, ECAI'92, Wiley and Sons, 1992, pp. 299–303.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Y.H. Tan and J. Treur, Constructive default logic in a meta-level architecture, in: A Yonezawa, B.C. Smith (eds.), Proc. International Workshop on new Models in Software Architecture (IMSA) 1992, Reflection and Meta-level Architectures, 1992, pp. 184–189.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    J. Treur, Completeness and definability in diagnostic expert systems, Proc. European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, ECAI'88, München, 1988, pp. 619–624.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    J. Treur, On the use of reflection principles in modelling complex reasoning, International Journal of Intelligent Systems 6 (1991), pp. 277–294.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    J. Treur, Declarative functionality descriptions of interactive reasoning modules, In: H. Boley, M.M. Richter (eds.), Processing Declarative Knowledge, Proc. of the International Workshop PDK'91, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 567, Springer Verlag, 1991, pp. 221–236.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    J. Treur, P. Veerkamp, Explicit representation of design process knowledge, in: J.S. Gero (ed.), Artificial Intelligence in Design '92, Proc. AID'92, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1992, pp. 677–696.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    J. Treur and Th. Wetter (eds.), Formal Specification of Complex Reasoning Systems, Ellis Horwood, 1993, pp 282.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    R.W. Weyhrauch, Prolegomena to a theory of mechanized formal reasoning, Artificial Intelligence 13 (1980), pp. 133–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jan Treur
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Mathematics and Computer ScienceFree University AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations