Aceto, Giacomo
(2010)
Implementation of a non ground meta interpreter for defeasible logic.
[Laurea specialistica], Università di Bologna, Corso di Studio in
Ingegneria informatica [LS-DM509]
Documenti full-text disponibili:
Abstract
Human reasoning is a fascinating and complex cognitive process that can be applied in
different research areas such as philosophy, psychology, laws and financial. Unfortunately,
developing supporting software (to those different areas) able to cope such as complex
reasoning it’s difficult and requires a suitable logic abstract formalism.
In this thesis we aim to develop a program, that has the job to evaluate a theory (a set of
rules) w.r.t. a Goal, and provide some results such as “The Goal is derivable from the KB5
(of the theory)”. In order to achieve this goal we need to analyse different logics and choose
the one that best meets our needs.
In logic, usually, we try to determine if a given conclusion is logically implied by a set
of assumptions T (theory). However, when we deal with programming logic we need an
efficient algorithm in order to find such implications. In this work we use a logic rather
similar to human logic. Indeed, human reasoning requires an extension of the first order
logic able to reach a conclusion depending on not definitely true6 premises belonging to a
incomplete set of knowledge. Thus, we implemented a defeasible logic7 framework able to
manipulate defeasible rules.
Defeasible logic is a non-monotonic logic designed for efficient defeasible reasoning by Nute (see Chapter
2).
Those kind of applications are useful in laws area especially if they offer an implementation
of an argumentation framework that provides a formal modelling of game. Roughly
speaking, let the theory is the set of laws, a keyclaim is the conclusion that one of the party
wants to prove (and the other one wants to defeat) and adding dynamic assertion of rules,
namely, facts putted forward by the parties, then, we can play an argumentative challenge
between two players and decide if the conclusion is provable or not depending on the different
strategies performed by the players.
Implementing a game model requires one more meta-interpreter able to evaluate the
defeasible logic framework; indeed, according to Göedel theorem (see on page 127), we
cannot evaluate the meaning of a language using the tools provided by the language itself,
but we need a meta-language able to manipulate the object language8.
Thus, rather than a simple meta-interpreter, we propose a Meta-level containing different
Meta-evaluators. The former has been explained above, the second one is needed to perform
the game model, and the last one will be used to change game execution and tree derivation
strategies.
Abstract
Human reasoning is a fascinating and complex cognitive process that can be applied in
different research areas such as philosophy, psychology, laws and financial. Unfortunately,
developing supporting software (to those different areas) able to cope such as complex
reasoning it’s difficult and requires a suitable logic abstract formalism.
In this thesis we aim to develop a program, that has the job to evaluate a theory (a set of
rules) w.r.t. a Goal, and provide some results such as “The Goal is derivable from the KB5
(of the theory)”. In order to achieve this goal we need to analyse different logics and choose
the one that best meets our needs.
In logic, usually, we try to determine if a given conclusion is logically implied by a set
of assumptions T (theory). However, when we deal with programming logic we need an
efficient algorithm in order to find such implications. In this work we use a logic rather
similar to human logic. Indeed, human reasoning requires an extension of the first order
logic able to reach a conclusion depending on not definitely true6 premises belonging to a
incomplete set of knowledge. Thus, we implemented a defeasible logic7 framework able to
manipulate defeasible rules.
Defeasible logic is a non-monotonic logic designed for efficient defeasible reasoning by Nute (see Chapter
2).
Those kind of applications are useful in laws area especially if they offer an implementation
of an argumentation framework that provides a formal modelling of game. Roughly
speaking, let the theory is the set of laws, a keyclaim is the conclusion that one of the party
wants to prove (and the other one wants to defeat) and adding dynamic assertion of rules,
namely, facts putted forward by the parties, then, we can play an argumentative challenge
between two players and decide if the conclusion is provable or not depending on the different
strategies performed by the players.
Implementing a game model requires one more meta-interpreter able to evaluate the
defeasible logic framework; indeed, according to Göedel theorem (see on page 127), we
cannot evaluate the meaning of a language using the tools provided by the language itself,
but we need a meta-language able to manipulate the object language8.
Thus, rather than a simple meta-interpreter, we propose a Meta-level containing different
Meta-evaluators. The former has been explained above, the second one is needed to perform
the game model, and the last one will be used to change game execution and tree derivation
strategies.
Tipologia del documento
Tesi di laurea
(Laurea specialistica)
Autore della tesi
Aceto, Giacomo
Relatore della tesi
Correlatore della tesi
Scuola
Corso di studio
Ordinamento Cds
DM509
Data di discussione della Tesi
23 Luglio 2010
URI
Altri metadati
Tipologia del documento
Tesi di laurea
(Tesi di laurea specialistica)
Autore della tesi
Aceto, Giacomo
Relatore della tesi
Correlatore della tesi
Scuola
Corso di studio
Ordinamento Cds
DM509
Data di discussione della Tesi
23 Luglio 2010
URI
Statistica sui download
Gestione del documento: