arrow
Return

Semantics for possibilistic answer set programs: Uncertain rules versus rules with uncertain conclusions

delete2014-01-01
delete8
delete
OA
AI
K
Kim Bauters *
S
Steven Schockaert
M
Martine De Cock
D
Dirk Vermeir
DOI:10.1016/j.ijar.2013.09.006delete
deleteOriginal
deleteShare
deleteSave
View PDF
Abstract

Abstract

En 中文
Although Answer Set Programming (ASP) is a powerful framework for declarative problem solving, it cannot in an intuitive way handle situations in which some rules are uncertain, or in which it is more important to satisfy some constraints than others. Possibilistic ASP (PASP) is a natural extension of ASP in which certainty weights are associated with each rule. In this paper we contrast two different views on interpreting the weights attached to rules. Under the first view, weights reflect the certainty with which we can conclude the head of a rule when its body is satisfied. Under the second view, weights reflect the certainty that a given rule restricts the considered epistemic states of an agent in a valid way, i.e. it is the certainty that the rule itself is correct. The first view gives rise to a set of weighted answer sets, whereas the second view gives rise to a weighted set of classical answer sets. (C) 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Keywords:
Logic programming
Non-monotonic reasoning
Possibility theory
Uncertainty
Stable model semantics
AI Summary

AI Summary

Key information extracted from the uploaded paper, including a brief overview, abstract, background, key highlights, visual analysis, and future outlook.

Journal

International Journal of Approximate Reasoning cover
International Journal of Approximate Reasoning
IF:
3
Papers:
2.9K
Citations:
5.1K

Organization

G
Ghent University
Scholars:
5.2W
Papers: 4.5W
Citations: 5.5W
C
Cardiff University
Scholars:
2.7W
Papers: 2.5W
Citations: 3.5W
V
Vrije Universiteit Brussel
Scholars:
1.4W
Papers: 1.3W
Citations: 129
researcher View more organizations