Stable Closures, Defeasible Logic and Contradiction Tolerant Reasoning

Paul Morris

A solution to the Yale shooting problem has been previously proposed that uses so-called non-normal defaults. This approach produces a single extension. One disadvantage, however, is . that new conflicting information causes the extension to collapse. In this paper we propose a new formal counterpart to the intuitive notion of a reasonable set of beliefs. The new formalization reduces to the previous one when there are no conflicts. However, when fresh conflicting information is added, instead of collapsing it produces a revised interpretation similar to that obtained by dependency-directed backtracking in a truth maintenance system. Consideration of the relationship to relevance logic motivates the development of a new formalism for default reasoning, called Defeasible Logic, which behaves like Autoepistemic Logic, but may be more intuitive.


This page is copyrighted by AAAI. All rights reserved. Your use of this site constitutes acceptance of all of AAAI's terms and conditions and privacy policy.