Logic and Knowledge Bases

نویسندگان

  • John Grant
  • Jack Minker
چکیده

IntroductIon Knowledge bases (KBs) must be able to capture a wide range of situations. One must be able to represent and answer questions regarding indefinite information where it is not clear that there is a unique answer to a question. One must also represent and answer questions about negative information. We discuss a powerful way to represent such information, namely through reasoning about knowledge bases using logic. In the real world, information known at one time may change. However, in first-order logic, information once known cannot change. This phenomenon is known as monotonicity. Since KBs deal with incomplete information, they are not monotonic. We shall discuss a form of logic programming, below, which is able to handle nonmonotonic information and situations required by KBs such as definite and indefinite data, and logical and default negation. The question of how to adapt first-order logic to handle complex situations started in the 1950s. Early systems handled problems in an ad hoc way. Several primitive deductive databases (DDBs), function-free logic programs, were developed in the 1960s. Robinson (1965) developed a general method for automated theorem proving to perform deduction. This method is known as the Robinson Resolution Principle; it is a generalization of mo-dus ponens to first-order predicate logic. Green and Raphael (1968) were the first to recognize the importance and applicability of the work performed by Robinson and developed a system using this principle. November 1977 is generally considered to be the start of the modern era of DDBs. A workshop , " Logic and Data Bases, " was organized in Toulouse, France, by Gallaire and Nicolas in collaboration with Minker. The workshop included researchers who had performed work in deduction from 1969 to 1977 using the Robinson Resolution Principle. The book Logic and Data Bases, edited by Gallaire and Minker (1978), contained these papers. Many significant contributions were described in the book. Nicolas and 682 Logic and Knowledge Bases Gallaire discussed the difference between model theory and proof theory. They demonstrated that the approach taken by the database community was model theoretic—that is, the database represents the truths of the theory, and queries are answered by a bottom-up search. However, in logic programming, answers to a query use a proof theoretic approach, starting from the query, in a top-down search. Reiter discussed the closed world assumption (CWA), whereby in a theory, if one cannot prove that an atomic formula is true, …

برای دانلود رایگان متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

G-Hybrid Knowledge Bases

Recently, there has been a lot of interest in the integration of Description Logics and rules on the Semantic Web. We define g-hybrid knowledge bases as knowledge bases that consist of a Description Logic knowledge base and a guarded logic program, similarly to the DL+log knowledge bases from [25]. G-hybrid knowledge bases enable an integration of Description Logics and Logic Programming where,...

متن کامل

Guarded hybrid knowledge bases

Recently, there has been a lot of interest in the integration of Description Logics and rules on the Semantic Web. We define guarded hybrid knowledge bases (or g-hybrid knowledge bases) as knowledge bases that consist of a Description Logic knowledge base and a guarded logic program, similar to the DL+log knowledge bases from (Rosati 2006). G-hybrid knowledge bases enable an integration of Desc...

متن کامل

2 00 3 an Algebraic Approach to Knowledge Bases Informational Equivalence

In this paper we study the notion of knowledge from the positions of universal algebra and algebraic logic. We consider first order knowledge which is based on first order logic. We define categories of knowledge and knowledge bases. These notions are defined for the fixed subject of knowledge. The key notion of informational equivalence of two knowledge bases is introduced. We use the idea of ...

متن کامل

Managing Inconsistent Possibilistic Knowledge Bases by An Argumentation Approach

Inconsistent knowledge bases usually are regarded as an epistemic hell that have to be avoided at all costs. However, many times it is di cult or impossible to stay away of managing inconsistent knowledge bases. In this paper, we introduce an argumentation-based approach in order to manage inconsistent possibilistic knowledge bases. This approach will be exible enough for managing inconsistent ...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

عنوان ژورنال:

دوره   شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 2011