Inheritance Theory and Path-Based Reasoning: An Introduction

  • Bob Carpenter
  • Richmond Thomason
Part of the Studies in Cognitive Systems book series (COGS, volume 5)

Abstract

The term “semantic networks” points to a variety of graph-based formalisms that are widely used for the representation of knowledge in computational systems. These network formalisms were introduced in this computational context by Quillian (see [Quillian67]), who used them to model human associative memory and hierarchical or taxonomic reasoning.

Keywords

Expressive Power Semantic Network Deductive System Negative Link Nonmonotonic Reasoning 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliography

  1. Brachman, R., R. Fikes, and H. Levesque. Krypton: a functional approach to knowledge representation. FLAIR Technical Report #16, Fairchild Laboratory for Artificial Intelligence Research 1983.Google Scholar
  2. Brachman, R. “I lied about the trees,” The AI Magazine 6, 1985.Google Scholar
  3. Brachman, R. and H. Levesque, eds. Readings in Knowledge Representation, Morgan Kaufmann, 1985.MATHGoogle Scholar
  4. Carlson, G. “Generic terms and generic sentences,” Journal of Philosophical Logic 11, 1982.Google Scholar
  5. Cross, C. and R. Thomason. “Update and conditionals,” Methodologies for Intelligent Systems, (Proceedings of The Second International Symposium on Methodologies for Intelligent Systems), Z. Ras and M. Zemankova, eds., Elsevier, 1987.Google Scholar
  6. Ellis, B. Rational Belief Systems, Rowman and Littlefield, 1979.Google Scholar
  7. Fahiman, S. NETL: A System for Representing and Using Real-world Knowledge, MIT Press, 1979.Google Scholar
  8. Gärdenfors, P. “Belief revision and the Ramsey test for conditionals,” Philosophical Review 95, 1986.Google Scholar
  9. Garey, M. and D. Johnson. Computers and Intractability, Freeman, 1979.MATHGoogle Scholar
  10. Horty, J. “Some Direct Theories of Nonmonotonic Inheritance,” Technical Report, School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  11. Horty, J. and R. Thomason. “Mixing Strict and Defeasible Inference,” Proceedings of AAAI-88, Morgan Kaufman, 1988.Google Scholar
  12. Horty, J. “A Defeasible Logic Based on Inheritance Theory,” Technical Report, School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  13. Horty, J., R. Thomason, and D. Touretzky. Touretzky. “A Skeptical Theory of Inheritance in Nonmonotonic Semantic Networks. Technical Report CMU-CS-87–175, Computer Science Department, Carnegie Mellon University 1987. An abbreviated version appears in Proceedings of AAAI-87, Morgan Kaufmann, 1987.Google Scholar
  14. Krifka, M. “An outline of genericity,” Technical Report. Seminar für Natürlich-sprachliche Systeme, Biesingerstr. 10, 7400 Tübingen, W. Germany, 1987.Google Scholar
  15. Krifka, M., ed. “Genericity in natural language: Proceedings of The 1988 Tübingen conference,” Seminar für Natürlich-sprachliche Systeme, 7400 Tübingen, W. Germany, 1988.Google Scholar
  16. Levesque, H. and R. Brachman. “A fundamental tradeoff in knowledge representation and reasoning,” Readings in Knowledge Representation, R. Brachman and H. Levesque, eds., Morgan Kaufmann, 1985.Google Scholar
  17. McCarthy, J. “Artificial intelligence, logic and formalizing common sense,” Logic and Artificial Intelligence, R. Thomason, ed., Kluwer, 1989.Google Scholar
  18. McGee, V. “A counterexample to modus ponens,” Journal of Philosophy 82, 1985.Google Scholar
  19. Minsky, M. “A framework for representing knowledge,” MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory Memo #306 1974. Reprinted without appendix in The Psychology of Computer Vision, P. Winston ed., McGraw-Hill, 1975.Google Scholar
  20. Pelletier, J. and L. Schubert. “Problems in the representation of the logical form of generics, bare plurals, and mass terms,” New Directions in Semantics, E. LePore, ed., Academic Press, 1987.Google Scholar
  21. Quillian, M. “Word concepts: a theory and simulation of some basic semantic capabilities,” Behavioral Science 12, 1967.Google Scholar
  22. Sandewall, E. “Non-monotonic inference rules for multiple inheritance with exceptions,” Proceedings of The IEEE 74, 1986.Google Scholar
  23. Sowa, J. Conceptual Structures: Information Processing in Mind and Machine, Addison-Wesley, 1984.MATHGoogle Scholar
  24. Stalnaker, R. “A theory of conditionals,” Studies in Logical Theory, N. Rescher, ed., Blackwell, 1968.Google Scholar
  25. Thomason, R., and J. Horty. “Logics for nonmonotonic inheritance,” Non-Monotonic Reasoning (Proceedings of the Second INternational Workshop on Non-Monotonic Reasoning), M. Reinfrank, J. de Kleer, M. Ginsberg, and E. Sandewall, eds., Springer Verlag, 1989Google Scholar
  26. Thomason, R., J. Horty, and D. Touretzky. “A calculus for inheritance in monotonic semantic nets,” Technical Report CMU-CS-86138, Computer Science Department, Carnegie Mellon University 1986.Google Scholar
  27. Thomason, R. and D. Touretzky. “An Inheritance Path Formulation of Roles and Relations,” Proceedings of The Catalina Conference on Formal Aspects of Semantic Networks,J. Sowa, ed., forthcoming.Google Scholar
  28. Thomason, R. and J. Aronis. “Hybridizing nonmonotonic inheritance with theorem proving,” Unpublished manuscript, 1988. To appear as a Carnegie Mellon University Technical Report.Google Scholar
  29. Touretzky, D. The Mathematics of Inheritance Systems, Morgan Kaufmann, 1986.MATHGoogle Scholar
  30. Touretzky, D., J. Horty, and R. Thomason. “A clash of intuitions: the current state of nonmonotonic multiple inheritance systems,” Proceedings of IJCAI-87, Morgan Kaufmann, 1987.Google Scholar
  31. Woods, W. “What’s in a link: foundations for semantic networks,” Representation and Understanding: Studies in Cognitive Science, D. Bobrow and A. Collins, Academic Press, 1975.Google Scholar
  32. Wos, L., R. Overbeck, E. Lusk, and J. Boyle. Automated Reasoning, Prentice-Hall, 1984.MATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bob Carpenter
  • Richmond Thomason

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations