Advertisement

Tableaux for diagnosis applications

  • Peter Baumgartner
  • Peter Fröhlich
  • Ulrich Furbach
  • Wolfgang Nejdl
Contributed Papers
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1227)

Abstract

In [NF96] a very efficient system for solving diagnosis tasks has been described, which is based on belief revision procedures and uses first order logic system descriptions. In this paper we demonstrate how such a system can be rigorously formalized from the viewpoint of deduction by using the calculus of hyper tableaux [BFN96]. The benefits of this approach are twofold: first, it gives us a clear logical description of the diagnosis task to be solved; second, as our experiments show, the approach is feasible in practice and thus serves as an example of a successful application of deduction techniques to real-world applications.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [BFN96]
    P. Baumgartner, U. Furbach, and I. Niemelä. Hyper Tableaux. In JELIA 96. European Workshop on Logic in AI, Springer, LNCS, 1996.Google Scholar
  2. [CT91]
    Luca Console and Pietro Torasso. A spectrum of logical definitions of model-based diagnosis. Computational Intelligence, 7(3):133–141, 1991.Google Scholar
  3. [CW94]
    T. S-C. Chou and M. Winslett. A model-based belief revision system. Journal of Automated Reasoning, 12:157–208, 1994.Google Scholar
  4. [dKW87]
    Johan de Kleer and Brian C. Williams. Diagnosing multiple faults. Artificial Intelligence, 32:97–130, 1987.Google Scholar
  5. [FN96]
    Peter Fröhlich and Wolfgang Nejdl. A model-based reasoning approach to circumscription. In Proceedings of the 12th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 1996.Google Scholar
  6. [Isc85]
    The ISCAS-85 Benchmarks. http://www.cbl.ncsu.edu/ www/CBL_Docs/iscas85.html, 1985.Google Scholar
  7. [MB88]
    R. Manthey and F. Bry. SATCHMO: a theorem prover implemented in Prolog. In Proc. 9th CADE. Argonnee, Illinois, Springer LNCS, 1988.Google Scholar
  8. [NF96]
    Wolfgang Nejdl and Peter Fröhlich. Minimal model semantics for diagnosis — techniques and first benchmarks. In Seventh International Workshop on Principles of Diagnosis, Val Morin, Canada, October 1996.Google Scholar
  9. [NG94]
    Wolfgang Nejdl and Brigitte Giefer. DRUM:Reasoning without conflicts and justifications. In 5th International Workshop on Principles of Diagnosis (DX-94), pages 226–233, October 1994.Google Scholar
  10. [RdKS93]
    Olivier Raiman, Johan de Kleer, and Vijay Saraswat. Critical reasoning. In Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 18–23, Chambery, August 1993.Google Scholar
  11. [Rei87]
    Raymond Reiter. A theory of diagnosis from first principles. Artificial Intelligence, 32:57–95, 1987.Google Scholar
  12. [Rob65]
    J. A. Robinson. Automated deduction with hyper-resolution. Internat. J. Comput. Math., 1:227–234, 1965.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peter Baumgartner
    • 1
  • Peter Fröhlich
    • 2
  • Ulrich Furbach
    • 1
  • Wolfgang Nejdl
    • 2
  1. 1.Institut für InformatikUniversität KoblenzDeutschland
  2. 2.Universität HannoverDeutschland

Personalised recommendations