Specification of flexible knowledge-based systems

Long Papers
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1319)


The paper focuses on the specification of flexible knowledge-based systems. A flexible system is capable of adapting its reasoning to the current problem. Its control is not deterministically defined but dynamically calculated. First, we present how TFL, the TASK formal language, enables to specify such a dynamic control. In TFL, a system is specified in terms of problems, reasoning processes, domain structures, strategies and task-modules Strategies describe heuristics for selecting or configuring the most relevant reasoning process at runtime. All these elements are specified by algebraic data types. For processes, an adaptation of classical data types was needed. Operators inspired from preferential logics were introduced for strategies. Second, we describe how TFL enables to address the problem of verifying the dynamic knowledge base. We show how it can be formally proved that a process is correct with respect to a given problem. To summarize, TFL specifications provide bolh a precise description of the underlying reasoning of flexible systems and a framework for its verification.


Knowledge Acquisition Process Correctness Flexible System Proof Obligation Task Language 
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. Andreka, H., Ryan, M. and Schobbens P.-Y. 1994. Laws of Generalised Priority Operators, In International Workshop on Information Systems — Correctness and Reusability (ISCORE'94)Google Scholar
  2. R. Wieringa, R. Feenstra (Eds.), VUA IR-357, World Scientific Publishers.Google Scholar
  3. Aussenac, N., Frontin, J., Soubie J.L. 1991. Evolution dune reprisentattion dcs connaissances pour l'acquisition. In Knowledge Modelling and Expertise Transfert, 21–24, IOS.Google Scholar
  4. Angele J., Decker, S., Perkuhn R., Studer R. 1997. Modeling Problem-solving Methods in NewKARL. In 7th workshop Knowledge Engineering Methods and Languages, KEML 97, Milton Keynes, England.Google Scholar
  5. Benjamins, R. and Pierret-Golbreich, C. 1996. Assumptions of Problem-Solving Methods. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, 1076, 9th European Knowledge Acquisition Workshop, N. Shadboldt and K. O Hara and G. Schreiber (Ed.), 1–16, Springer-VerlagGoogle Scholar
  6. Bidoit, M. 1989. PLUSS, un langage pour le développement de spécifications algébriques modulaires. Thése d'Etat, Université Paris Sud.Google Scholar
  7. Bredillet, P., Delouis-Jacob, I., Eyrolles, P., Jehl, O., Krivine J.P., Thiault, P., (1994). The AUSTRAL Expert System for Power Restorationon Distribution Systems, In Fifth Symposium in Intelligent Systems Application to Power Systems (ISAP'94), Montpellier, FranceGoogle Scholar
  8. Chandrasekaran, B., Johnson, T. R. and Smith, J. W. 1992. Task-structure analysis for knowledge modelling. Communications of th ACM, 35(9),124–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ermine, J-L. 1993. Génie logiciel et génie cognitif pour les systems à base de connaissances. Lavoisier Ed.Google Scholar
  10. Fensel D. 1995. The Knowledge Acquisition and Representation Language KARL. Boston, Dudreccht, London: Kluwer Academic Press.Google Scholar
  11. Fensel, D. and Groenbaum, R. 1996. MLPM: Defining semantics and Axiomatisation for Specifying the Reasoning Process of Knowledge-based Systems. In 12th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Budapest.Google Scholar
  12. Krivine, J. P., & Delouis, I. (1991). Interactive Knowledge-Based System for Assistance in the Analysis and Reinforcement of Power Subtransmission Networks. In Third Symposium on Expert Systems Application to Power Systems, Tokyo, Japon.Google Scholar
  13. Newell, A. (1982). The knowledge level. Artificial Intelligence, 18.Google Scholar
  14. Pierret-Golbreich, C. and Delouis I. 1991. TASK: task centered representation. In 8th Conference of the Society for the Study of Artificial Intelligence and Simulation of Behavior, Steels and Smith Ed., Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  15. Pierret-Golbreich, C. 1996. TASK, un environnement pour le dèveloppement de syst`emes à base de connaissances flexibles. Th`ese d'Habilitation à diriger des recherehes. Universitè Paris Sud.Google Scholar
  16. Pierret-Golbreich, C. 1996b. Correctness of Methods w.r.t Problems Specifications, Workshop on Validation Verification and Refinement of Knowledge-based systems of the 12th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Wahlster Ed., Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Google Scholar
  17. Pierret-Golbreich, C. and Talon, X. 1996. TFL: an algebraic language to specify the dynamic behaviour of KBS. The Knowledge Engineering Review, Vol 11: 3 253–280, Cambridge Press.Google Scholar
  18. Puerta, A., Agar, J.,Tu, S., and Musen, M. 1992. A multiple method shell for the automatic generation of knowledge acquisition tools. Knowledge Acquisition, 4, 171–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ryan, M. D. 1992. Representing defaults as sentences with reduced priority, In B. Nebel and W. Swartout (Ed.), Third International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR'92), Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
  20. Scapin, D.L., Pierret-Golbreich, C. 1990. Towards a method for task description: MAD. In Berlinguet L. and Berthelette D. (Ed.), Work with Display Units 89. 371–380, Elesevier Science Publishers.Google Scholar
  21. Schreiber, Wielinga and Breuker, J. 1993. KADS. A principled Approach to Knowledge-Based Systems Development. Knowledge Based Systems, vol. 11, Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
  22. Steels, L. 1990. Components of expertise. AI Magazine, 28–40Google Scholar
  23. Sebillotte, S. and Fallah, D. 1995. Task description “Resolve the, emergency situation: Fire”Google Scholar
  24. Final Technical report Esprit Project Intuitive P6593.Google Scholar
  25. Talon, X. and Pienet-Golbreich, C., 1996. TASK: from the specification to the implementation. In 8th IEEE International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence, 80–88, IEEE Computer Society Press.Google Scholar
  26. Talon, X. and Pierret-Golbreich, C. 1997. A language to specify strategies for flexible problemsolving. In 7th Knowledge Engineering Methods and Languages Workshop, KEML 97, Milton Keynes, England.Google Scholar
  27. van Harmelen and Balder, 1992. (ML)2, a formal language for KADS conceptual models. Knowledge Acquisition, 4:1, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.LRI URA CNRS 410Orsay CedexFrance

Personalised recommendations