Default reasoning as situated monotonic inference
Minds and Machines 8 (4):509-531 (1998)
| Abstract | Since its inception, situation theory has been concerned with the situated nature of meaning and cognition, a theme which has also recently gained some prominence in Artificial Intelligence. Channel theory is a recently developed framework which builds on concepts introduced in situation theory, in an attempt to provide a general theory of information flow. In particular, the channel theoretic framework offers an account of fallible regularities, regularities which provide enough structure to an agent's environment to support efficient cognitive processing but which are limited in their reliability to specific circumstances. This paper describes how this framework can lead to a different perspective on defeasible reasoning: rather than being seen as reasoning with incomplete information, an agent makes use of a situated regularity, choosing to use the regularity that seems best suited (trading off reliability and simplicity) to the circumstances it happens to find itself in. We present a formal model for this task, based on the channel theoretic framework, and sketch how the model may be used as the basis for a methodology of defeasible situated reasoning, whereby agents reason with simple monotonic regularities but may revise their choice of regularity on learning more about their circumstances. | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | No categories specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,709 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesAlvaro Vadell & Yoav Shoham (1994). Deriving Properties of Belief Update From Theories of Action. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 3 (2).
Robert A. Kowalski & Francesca Toni (1996). Abstract Argumentation. Artificial Intelligence and Law 4 (3-4):275-296.
Daniele Porello (2012). Incompatibility Semantics From Agreement. Philosophia 40 (1):99-119.
Gregory Wheeler & Carlos Damasio (2004). An Implementation of Statistical Default Logic. In Jose Alferes & Joao Leite (eds.), Logics in Artificial Intelligence (JELIA 2004). Springer.
G. Aldo Antonelli (1996). Defeasible Reasoning as a Cognitive Model. In Krister Segerberg (ed.), The Parikh Project. Seven Papers in Honour of Rohit. Uppsala Prints & Preprints in Philosophy.
H. Nakashima (1999). AI as Complex Information Processing. Minds and Machines 9 (1):57-80.
Analytics
Monthly downloads
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
|
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads0Recent downloads (6 months)0How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
