zbMATH — the first resource for mathematics

A paraconsistent approach to actions in informationally complex environments. (English) Zbl 07121048
The paper deals with an important issue of reasoning, planning and acting in informationally complex and dynamic environments. Due to the heterogeneity of distributed information sources of diverse quality and credibility, inconsistent and incomplete information is a common phenomenon. Hence, planning actions that would not only tolerate but also handle such situations in a tractable way is a significant issue, in particular in critical or emergency situations in our reality. To this end, the paper introduces ACTLOG, a rule-based four-valued language designed to specify actions in a paraconsistent and paracomplete manner. The language is an extension of 4QLBel, which is a language for reasoning with paraconsistent belief bases. The actions specified in ACTLOG can be conceived as the activity that transform a belief basefrom one its state too another. In contrast to other approaches, ACTLOG actions can be executed even when the underlying belief base information is inconsistent and/or incomplete. ACTLOG also makes it possible to deal with composite actions using sequential and parallel compositions as well as conditional specifications. The framework is illustrated on a decontamination case study known from the literature.
The main goal of the paper is to introduce a tool for planning actions such that it is rich enough to deal with inconsistent and incomplete information bases. An additional goal, which the paper addresses as well, is to develop actions’ specification language, adequate for reasoning and planning in informationally complex and sometimes defective environments. The authors introduce ACTLOG that makes it possible meet these goals in a computationally tractable way.
In principal, the ACTLOG language is a four-valued logic. In order to achieve the required expressiveness, tractability and modelling convenience, next to truth \((t)\) and falsity \((f)\) two additional truth values are introduced, namely inconsistent \((i)\) and unknown \((u)\). The four-valued language employs the connectives \(\neg\), \(\wedge\), \(\vee\) and \(\rightarrow\) that behave classically on classical truth values \(t, f\). When the set of truth values is restricted to \(t, f ,u\) or to \(t, f, i\), the resulting logic is the well-known three-valued logic of Kleene, where the non-classical truth values represent indefiniteness, which is commonly accepted in modelling lack of knowledge, and inconsistency. ACTLOG belongs to the 4QL family of four-valued, rule-based languages. It builds on 4QLBel, which is the extension of the 4QL rule language. The doxastic extension 4QLBel operates with belief bases that consist of the so-called \(3i\)-worlds (possibly inconsistent or undefined information states) and is designed towards specifying actions.
The specification of composite actions is important in applications of the ACTLOG language. Composite actions are specified as compositions of atomic actions (with parameters) by means of the operator ‘;’ for sequential composition), \(\Rightarrow\) for the conditional ‘if-then-else’ composition and ‘\(\Vert\)’ for parallel composition.
Summing up, ACTLOG provides a nuanced action specification tools, allowing for subtle interplay among various forms of nonmonotonic, paraconsistent, paracomplete and doxastic reasoning methods applicable in informationally complex environments.
The paper is written in a crisp and clear way, without typos. All concepts are well defined and their applications demonstrated by examples. Perhaps the only one negative comment is this. Tables should be inserted close to the point where they are referred to. It is not a good practice to insert a table among the text of another paragraph than that one that refers to it.
03B53 Paraconsistent logics
03B42 Logics of knowledge and belief (including belief change)
68N17 Logic programming
68T27 Logic in artificial intelligence
Full Text: DOI
[1] Abiteboul, S., Hull, R., Vianu, V.: Foundations of databases. Addison-Wesley Pub. Co., Reading (1996)
[2] Belnap, N.: How a Computer Should Think. In: Ryle, G. (ed.) Contemporary Aspects of Philosophy, pp 30-55. Oriel Press, Stocksfield (1977)
[3] Bertossi, L., Hunter, A., Schaub, T.: Introduction to inconsistency tolerance. In: Bertossi et al. (ed.). Inconsistency Tolerance, LNCS, pp. 1-14 · Zbl 1111.68667
[4] Bertossi, L., Hunter, A., Schaub, T. (eds.): Inconsistency Tolerance, LNCS, vol. 3300. Springer, Berlin (2005) · Zbl 1063.68001
[5] Białek, Ł., Dunin-Kęplicz, B., Szałas, A.: Rule-Based Reasoning with Belief Structures. In: Kryszkiewicz, M., Appice, A., Ślęzak, D., Rybiński, H., Skowron, A., RaŚ, Z. (eds.) Foundations of Intelligent Systems, Proceedings of ISMIS Conference. LNAI, vol. 10352, pp 229-239. Springer (2017)
[6] Białek, Ł., Dunin-Kęplicz, B., Szałas, A.: Towards a Paraconsistent Approach to Actions in Distributed Information-Rich Environments. In: Ivanović, M., Bădică, C., Dix, J., Jovanović, Z., Malgeri, M., Savić, M. (eds.) Proceedings of IDC - Intelligent Distributed Computing XI. Studies in Computational Intelligence, vol. 737, pp 49-60. Springer (2017)
[7] Doherty, P.; Kvarnström, J., TALplanner: A temporal logic based forward chaining planner, Ann. Math. Artif. Intell., 30, 119-169, (2001) · Zbl 1002.68158
[8] Doherty, P.; Kvarnström, J., TALplanner: A temporal logic-based planner, AI Mag., 22, 95-102, (2001) · Zbl 1002.68158
[9] Doherty, P., Kvarnström, J.: The Handbook of Knowledge Representation. In: Lifschitz, V., Van Harmelen, F., Porter, F. (eds.) , pp 709-757. Elsevier (2008)
[10] Doherty, P., Kvarnström, J., Szałas, A.: Temporal Composite Actions with Constraints. In: Brewka, G., Eiter, T., Mcilraith, S. (eds.) Proceedings of 13Th International Conference KR: Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, pp 478-488. AAAI Press (2012)
[11] Doherty, P., Szałas, A.: Stability, supportedness, minimality and Kleene Answer Set Programs. In: Eiter, T., Strass, H., Truszczyński, M., Woltran, S. (eds.) Advances in Knowledge Representation, Logic Programming, and Abstract Argumentation, LNCS, vol. 9060, pp 125-140. Springer International Publishing (2015) · Zbl 1432.68457
[12] Dunin-Kęplicz, B., Szałas, A.: Epistemic Profiles and Belief Structures. In: Proceedings of KES-AMSTA 2012: Agents and Multi-Agent Systems: Technologies and Applications. LNCS, vol. 7327, pp 360-369. Springer (2012)
[13] Dunin-Kęplicz, B.; Szałas, A., Taming complex beliefs, Trans. Comput. Collective Intell. XI LNCS, 8065, 1-21, (2013)
[14] Dunin-Kęplicz, B., Szałas, A.: Indeterministic Belief Structures. In: Jezic, G., Kusek, M., Lovrek, I., Howlett, J., Lakhmi, J. (eds.) Agent and Multi-Agent Systems: Technologies and Applications: Proceedings of 8th International Conference KES-AMSTA, pp 57-66. Springer (2014)
[15] Dunin-Kęplicz, B., Verbrugge, R.: Teamwork in Multi-Agent systems. a formal approach. Wiley, New York (2010) · Zbl 1061.68146
[16] Dunin-Kęplicz, B.; Verbrugge, R.; Ślizak, M., TeamLog in action: a case study in teamwork, Comput. Sci. Inf. Syst., 7, 569-595, (2010)
[17] Edelkamp, S., Hoffmann, J.: PDDL2: The language for the classical part of the 4th international planning competition. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Planning Competition (2004)
[18] Eiter, T., Faber, W., Leone, N., Pfeifer, G., Polleres, A.: Planning under Incomplete Knowledge. In: Lloyd, J., Dahl, V., Furbach, U., Kerber, M., Lau, K.K., Palamidessi, C., Pereira, L., Sagiv, Y., Stuckey, P. (eds.) Proceedings of Computational Logic: 1St International Conference, pp 807-821. Springer (2000) · Zbl 0983.68539
[19] Eiter, T., Faber, W., Pfeifer, G.: Declarative Planning and Knowledge Representation in an Action Language. In: Sugumaran, V. (ed.) Intelligent Information Technologies: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications, pp 192-221. IGI Global (2008)
[20] Fagin, R., Halpern, J., Moses, Y., Vardi, M.: Reasoning about knowledge the. MIT Press, Cambridge (2003) · Zbl 0839.68095
[21] Ferraris, P., Lifschitz, V.: On the Minimality of Stable Models. In: Balduccini, M., Son, T. (eds.) Logic Programming, Knowledge Representation, and Nonmonotonic Reasoning. LNCS, vol. 6565, pp 64-73. Springer (2011) · Zbl 1326.68056
[22] Fikes, R.E., Nilsson, N.J.: STRIPS: a new approach to the application of theorem proving to problem solving. In: Proceedings of the 2Nd International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 608-620. IJCAI’71, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc. (1971) · Zbl 0234.68036
[23] Fitting, M.: Bilattices are Nice Things. In: Proceedings of Philog Conference on Self-Reference. The Danish Network for Philosophical Logic and Its Applications, Copenhagen (2002)
[24] Fitting, M.C.: Bilattices in Logic Programming. In: Epstein, G. (ed.) 20Th International Symposium on Multiple-Valued Logic, pp 238-247. IEEE CS Press, Los Alamitos (1990)
[25] Ginsberg, M.: Multi-Valued Logics. In: 5Th National Conference on AI Proceedings of AAAI-86. pp. 243-247 (1986)
[26] Ginsberg, M., Multivalued logics: a uniform approach to reasoning in AI, Comput. Intell., 4, 256-316, (1988)
[27] Giunchiglia, E.; Lee, J.; Lifschitz, V.; Mc-Cain, N.; Turner, H., Nonmonotonic causal theories, Artif. Intell., 153, 49-104, (2004) · Zbl 1085.68161
[28] Hewitt, C.: Formalizing common sense for scalable inconsistency-robust information integration using Direct Logic reasoning and the actor model. arXiv:0812.4852 (2008)
[29] Hewitt, C., Woods, J. (eds.): Inconsistency Robustness. College Publications (2015)
[30] Kowalski, R.; Sergot, M., A logic-based calculus of events, N. Gener. Comput., 4, 67-95, (1986) · Zbl 1356.68221
[31] Lever, J., Richards, B.: parcPlan: a Planning Architecture with Parallel Actions, Resources and Constraints. In: Raṡ, Z. W., Zemankova, M. (eds.) Methodologies for Intelligent Systems, pp 213-222. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin (1994)
[32] Levesque, H.; Pirri, F.; Reiter, R., Foundations for the situation calculus, Electron. Trans. AI, 2, 159-178, (1998)
[33] Levesque, H.; Reiter, R.; Lespérance, Y.; Lin, F.; Scherl, R., GOLOG: a logic programming language for dynamic domains, J. Log. Program., 31, 59-84, (1997) · Zbl 0880.68008
[34] Małuszyński, J., Szałas, A.: Living with Inconsistency and Taming Nonmonotonicity. In: De Moor, O., Gottlob, G., Furche, T., Sellers, A. (eds.) Datalog Reloaded. LNCS, vol. 6702, pp 384-398. Springer (2011)
[35] Małuszyński, J.; Szałas, A., Logical foundations and complexity of 4QL, a query language with unrestricted negation, J. Appl. Non-Class. Log., 21, 211-232, (2011) · Zbl 1242.68091
[36] Małuszyński, J., Szałas, A.: Partiality and Inconsistency in Agents’ Belief Bases. In: Barbucha, D., Le, M., Howlett, R., Jain, L. (eds.) KES-AMSTA. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, vol. 252, pp 3-17. IOS Press (2013)
[37] Małuszyński, J., Szałas, A., Vitória, A.: Paraconsistent Logic Programs with Four-Valued Rough Sets. In: Chan, C.C., Grzymala-Busse, J., Ziarko, W. (eds.) Proceedings of 6Th International Conference on Rough Sets and Current Trends in Computing (RSCTC 2008). LNAI, vol. 5306, pp 41-51 (2008) · Zbl 1185.68713
[38] McCarthy, J., Laboratory, S.A.I.: Situations, Actions, and Causal Laws. Memo (Stanford Artificial Intelligence Project), Stanford University, AI Project (1963)
[39] Mcilraith, S., Fadel, R.: Planning with Complex Actions. In: Proceedings NMR’02, pp. 356-364 (2002)
[40] Mueller, E.: Commonsense reasoning. An Event Calculus Based Approach. Morgan Faufmann, San Mateo (2006)
[41] Regnier, P., Fade, B.: Complete Determination of Parallel Actions and Temporal Optimization in Linear Plans of Action. In: European Workshop on Planning, pp 100-111. Springer, Berlin (1991)
[42] Reiter, R.: The Frame Problem in the Situation Calculus: a Simple Solution (Sometimes) and a Completeness Result for Goal Regression. In: Lifshitz, V. (ed.) Artificial Intelligence and Mathematical Theory of Computation: Papers in Honour of John Mccarthy, pp 359-380. Academic Press Professional Inc. (1991) · Zbl 0755.68124
[43] Reiter, R.: Knowledge in action: Logical foundations for specifying and implementing dynamical systems. MIT Press, Cambridge (2001) · Zbl 1018.03022
[44] Sakama, C.; Inoue, K., An alternative approach to the semantics of disjunctive logic programs and deductive databases, J. Autom. Reason., 13, 145-172, (1994) · Zbl 0819.68036
[45] Sandewall, E.: Features and Fluents: The Representation of Knowledge about Dynamical Systems, vol. 1 Clarendon Press (1994) · Zbl 0842.68077
[46] Shepherdson, J.: Negation in Logic Programming. In: Minker, J. (ed.) Foundations of Deductive Databases and Logic Programming, pp 19-88, Morgan Kaufmann (1988) · Zbl 0718.68020
[47] Shieber, S.M.: Solving Problems in an Uncertain World. Bachelor’s thesis, Harvard College (1981)
[48] Shoham, Y.: Reasoning about change: Time and causation from the standpoint of artificial intelligence. MIT Press, Cambridge (1987)
[49] Soininen, T., Niemelȧ, I.: Developing a Declarative Rule Language for Applications in Product Configuration. In: Gupta, G. (ed.) Proceedings of PADL’99. LNCS, vol. 1551, pp 305-319. Springer (1999)
[50] Szałas, A., How an agent might think, Log. J. IGPL, 21, 515-535, (2013) · Zbl 1272.68382
[51] Thielscher, M., Introduction to the fluent calculus, Electron. Trans. AI, 2, 179-192, (1998)
[52] Thielscher, M., FLUX: a logic programming method for reasoning agents, Theory Pract. Log. Programm., 5, 533-565, (2005) · Zbl 1105.68333
[53] Thielscher, M.: Reasoning robots: The art and science of programming robotic agents. Springer, Berlin (2011) · Zbl 1092.68101
[54] Thrun, S., Burgard, W., Fox, D.: Probabilistic robotics (intelligent robotics and autonomous agents). The MIT Press, Cambridge (2005) · Zbl 1081.68703
[55] Vitória, A.; Małuszyński, J.; Szałas, A., Modeling and reasoning with paraconsistent rough sets, Fund. Inf., 97, 405-438, (2009) · Zbl 1186.68468
[56] Wilkins, DE, Domain-independent planning representation and plan generation, Artif. Intell., 22, 269-301, (1984)
[57] Wilkins, DE; Myers, KL; Lowrance, JD; Wesley, LP, Planning and reacting in uncertain and dynamic environments, J. Exper. Theor. Artif. Intell., 7, 121-152, (1995) · Zbl 0939.68834
[58] Zadeh, L., Fuzzy sets, Inf. Control, 8, 333-353, (1965) · Zbl 0139.24606
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. It attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming the completeness or perfect precision of the matching.