A logic for concurrent events and action failure

  • David Morley
  • Liz Sonenberg
Knowledge Representation II
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1114)


When reasoning about agents interacting in a dynamic world, two problems present themselves: other events and actions may occur while an agent is acting; and an agent's actions may fail. We present a more expressive formalism for representing the different ways that events can occur together and extend a recently introduced logic of events to handle concurrent events. We apply the approach of Traverso and Spalazzi to handle actions and failure to obtain a logic that allows for concurrent events and admits reasoning with failure.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Drakengren, T. 1996. Compositionality and the frame problem. Technical Report LiTH-IDA-R-96-4, Department of Computer and Information Science, Linköping University.Google Scholar
  2. Ferguson, G. M. 1995. Knowledge Representation and Reasoning for Mixed-Initiative Planning. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York.Google Scholar
  3. Gelfond, M., Lifschitz, V., and Rabinov, A. 1991. What are the limitations of the situation calculus? In Boyer, R., ed., Automated Reasoning: Essays in Honor of Woody Bledsoe. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Press. 167–179.Google Scholar
  4. Georgeff, M. P., and Ingrand, F. F. 1990. Real-time reasoning: The monitoring and control of spacecraft systems. In Proceedings of the Sixth IEEE Conference on Artificial Intelligence Applications.Google Scholar
  5. Georgeff, M. P. 1987. Actions, processes, and causality. In Reasoning about Actions and Plans: Proceedings of the 1986 Workshop, 99–122. Los Altos, California: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
  6. Giunchiglia, F., Spalazzi, L., and Traverso, P. 1994. Planning with failure. In Proceedings Second International Conference on AI Planning Systems (AIPS-94).Google Scholar
  7. McCarthy, J., and Hayes, P. J. 1969. Some philosophical problems from the standpoint of artificial intelligence. Machine Intelligence 4:463–502.Google Scholar
  8. Morley, D. N., Sonenberg, E., and Georgeff, M. P. 1995. Saying you are there. In Yao, X., ed., Proceedings Eighth Australian Joint Conference on AI (AI'95), 123–130. Singapore: World Scientific.Google Scholar
  9. Schubert, L. 1990. Monotonic solution of the frame problem in the situation calculus. In Kyburg, H. E., Loui, R. P., and Carlson, G. N., eds., Knowledge Representation and Defeasible Reasoning, volume 5 of Studies in Cognitive Science. Kluwer Academic Press. 23–67.Google Scholar
  10. Traverso, P., and Spalazzi, L. 1995. A logic for acting, sensing and planning. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI95), 1491–1497. Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • David Morley
    • 1
  • Liz Sonenberg
    • 2
  1. 1.Australian A. I. Institute Ltd.MelbourneAustralia
  2. 2.Dept. of Computer ScienceUniversity of MelbourneParkvilleAustralia

Personalised recommendations