Sixth International Conference on Principles of
|
|
|
Sixth International Conference on Principles of
|
|
|
8:45 - 9:00 Plenary Session: Open Ceremony
9:00 - 10:10 Plenary Session: Invited Talk
How
to tailor representations to different requirements
Katharina Morik
10:10 - 10:40 Coffee Break
10:40 - 12:40 Session 1: Building, Merging, Revising Theories
Description logic framework
for information integration
Calvanese, D., De Giacomo,
G., Lenzerini, M., Nardi, D., Rosati, R.
A completeness result for
reasoning with incomplete first-order knowledge bases
Levesque, H.L.
A strategy for revising
default theory extensions
Williams, M.-A., Antoniou,
G.
12:40 - 14:00 Lunch Break
14:00 - 16:00 Session 3: Logic Programming based Representations
A comparison of the static
and the disjunctive well-founded semantics and its implementation
Brass, S., Dix, J.,
Niemelä, I., Przymusisnski, T.
Preferred answer sets for
extended logic programs
Brewka, G., Eiter, T.
Dynamic logic programming
Alferes, J.J., Leite,
J.A., Pereira, L.M., Przymusinska, H., Przymusinski, T. C.
16:00 - 16:30 Coffee Break
16:30 - 18:30 Session 5: Building, Merging, Revising Theories
A general approach for
inconsistency handling and merging information in prioritized
knowledge bases
Benferhat, S., Dubois,
D., Lang, J., Prade, H., Saffiotti, A., Smets. P.
Formal theory building
using automated reasoning tools
Kamps, J.
On the logic of merging
Konieczny, S., Pino
Pèrez R.
10:10 - 10:40 Coffee Break
10:40 - 12:40 Session 2: Reasoning about Actions
Anything can happen: on
narratives and hypothetical reasoning
Karlsson, L.
Combining narratives
McCarthy, J., Costello,
T.
How (not) to minimize events
Thielscher, M.
12:40 - 14:00 Lunch Break
14:00 - 16:00 Session 4: Qualitative Spatio/temporal Reasoning
Foundations of spatioterminological
reasoning with description logics
Haarslev, V., Lutz,
C., Möller, R.
A model for reasoning about
bidemsional temporal relations
Balbiani, P., Condotta,
J.-F., Fariñas Del Cerro, L.
A qualitative theory of
motion based on spatio-temporal primitives
Muller, P.
16:00 - 16:30 Coffee Break
16:30 - 18:30 Session 6: Non Monotonic Reasoning
Comparing consequence relations
Flach, P.A.
SYSTEM JZ - How to build
a canonical ranking model of a default knowledge base
Weydert, E.
Pointwise circumscription
revisited
Amir, E.
9:00 - 10:20 Session 7: Planning
Satisfiability
planning with causal theories
McCain, N., Turner,
H.
On measuring plan quality
Lin, F.
10:20 - 10:40 Coffee Break
10:40 - 12:40 Session 9: Belief Revision and Contextual Reasoning
The PMA and relativizing
minimal change for action update
Doherty, P., Lukaszewicz,
W., Madalinska-Bugaj, Ewa
Quantifiers and operations
on modalities and contexts
Costello, T., Patterson,
A.
Local Models Semantics,
or Contextual Reasoning = Locality + Compatibility
Giunchiglia, F., Chidini,
C.
12:40 - 14:00 Lunch Break
14:00 - 15:20 Session 11: Formal Results in Spatial Reasoning
A canonical model of the
region connection calculus
Renz, J.
Undecidability of plane
polygonal mereotopology
Dornheim, C.
16:00 - 16:30 Coffee Break
9:00 - 10:20 Session 8: Efficient Modal Reasoning
More evaluation of decision
procedures for modal logics
Giunchiglia, E., Giunchiglia,
F., Sebastiani, R., Tacchella, A.
Using an expressive description
logic: FaCT or fiction?
Horrocks, I.R.
10:20 - 10:40 Coffee Break
10:40 - 12:40 Session 10: Reasoning about Actions
Concurrent actions and
interacting effects
Pinto, J.
Logic based modelling of
goal-directed behavior
Sandewall, E.J.
AOL: a logic of acting,
sensing, knowing, and only knowing
Lakemeyer, G., Levesque,
h.J.
12:40 - 14:00 Lunch Break
14:00 - 16:00 Session 12: Complexity of Reasoning
Complexity results for
independence and definability in propositional logic
Lang, J., Marquis, P.
The complexity of model
checking in modal event calculi with quantifiers
Cervesato, I., Franceschet,
M., Montanari, A.
Probabilistic deduction
with conditional constraints over basic events
Lukasiewicz, T.L.
16:00 - 16:30 Coffee Break
16:30 - 18:30 Plenary Session: Panel
Themes at the colocated
workshops
Chair: Lin Padgham
9:00 - 10:10 Plenary Session: Invited Talk
What
robots can do
Hector Levesque
10:10 - 10:40 Coffee Break
10:40 - 12:40 Session 13: Logic Programming based Representations
Specifying transactions
for extended abduction
Inoue, K., Sakama, C.
The knowledge representation
system dlv: Progress report, comparisons and benchmarks
Eiter, T., Leone, N.,
Mateis, C., Pfeifer, G., Scarcello, F.
Disjunctive ordered logic:
Semantics and expressiveness
Buccafurri, F., Leone,
N., Rullo, P.
12:40 Lunch
10:10 - 10:40 Coffee Break
10:40 - 12:40 Session 14: Planning and Execution
Modeling an agent's incomplete
knowledge during planning and during execution
Bacchus, F., Petrick,
R.
Reformulating temporal
plans for efficient execution
Muscettola, N., Morris,
P., Tsamardinos, I.
Execution monitoring of
high-level robot programs
De Giacomo, G., Reiter,
R., Soutchanski, M.
12:40 Lunch
9:00 - 10:10 Plenary Session: Invited Talk
Description
Logics and their applications
Maurizio Lenzerini
10:10 - 10:40 Coffee Break
10:40 - 12:40 Session 15: Diagnosis
On the compilability of
diagnosis, planning, reasoning about actions, belief revision,
etc.
Liberatore, P.
Compiling devices: A structure-based
approach
Darwiche, A.
Explanatory diagnosis:
Conjecturing actions to explain observations
McIlraith, S.
12:40 - 14:00 Lunch Break
14:00 - 16:00 Session 17: Reasoning about Actions
Situation calculus and
causal logic
Lifschitz, V.
Sequential, temporal GOLOG
Reiter, R.
Building models of prediction
theories
White, G., Bell, J.,
Hodges, W.
16:00 - 16:30 Coffee Break
16:30 - 17:50 Session 19: Planning
Encoding planning constraints
into partial order planners
Baioletti, M., Marcugini,
S., Milani, A.
A planning algorithm not
based on directional search
Rintanen, J.T.
10:10 - 10:40 Coffee Break
10:40 - 12:40 Session 16: Description Logics and Graph Based Languages
Characterizing the semantics
of terminological cycles in ALN using finite automata
Küsters, R.
On the decidability of
description logics with modal operators
Wolter, F., Zakharyaschev,
M.
Nested graphs: A graph-based
knowledge representation model with FOL semantics
Chein, M., Mugnier,
M.-L., Simonet, G.
12:40 - 14:00 Lunch Break
14:00 - 16:00 Session 18: Probabilistic Reasoning
Reasoning about infinite
random structures with relational Bayesian networks
Jaeger, M.
Geometric foundations for
interval-based probabilities
Ha, V., Haddawy, P.
Making decision in a qualitative
setting: from decision under uncertainty to case-based decision
Dubois, D., Godo, L.,
Prade, H., Zapico, A.
16:00 - 16:30 Coffee Break
16:30 - 17:50 Session 20: Representing Granularity and Vagueness
Modal
semantics for knowledge bases dealing with vague concepts
Bennett, B.
A theory of granularity
and its application to problems of polysemy and underspecification
of meaning
Mani, I.
The dream of a general purpose knowledge representation language has long been abandoned. However, most work on tailoring representation formalisms to particular needs has investigated deductive inference. The focus has been on inferential services for problem solving, e.g. classification or planning. The needs of the end user, be it a system (e.g., a natural language system or a robot) or a human user, determine the requirements for efficiency and expressiveness. If we focus on the knowledge engineer, additional requirements come into play: inspectability and revisability are major concerns in the process of knowledge acquisition. However, the underlying inference is still deductive. But the requirements on a knowledge representation formalism change when inductive inference is considered. A representation formalism with less expressive power may be harder to learn than a one with a higher expressive power. This means that complexity results for deductive reasoning cannot easily be transferred to inductive reasoning. Moreover, we frequently we encounter conflicting requirements for learning and problem solving. In this situation, asking for a representation that fulfills the requirements for both deductive and inductive inference, is akin to asking for a general purpose language. Instead, we design families of representations, where each family member is well suited for a particular set of requirements, and implement transformations between the representations.
In this talk, I discuss the representation family of Horn logic. Several restrictions of Horn logic have been investigated that ease learning. Three case studies illustrate how to tailor admissible languages. The first case study from a robotics application shows how a representation that is well suited for learning is transformed into an efficient deductive reasoner. The second case study exploits learning in order to enhance the understandibility and inspectability of a knowledge base under construction by a knowledge engineer. The third case study presents a tool that generates mappings from a relational database scheme to a Horn logic signature. Such mappings allow learning to take place directly from a relational database.
We propose a definition of goal achievability: given a basic action theory describing an initial state of the world and some primitive actions available to a robot, including some actions which return sensing information, what goals can be achieved by the robot? The main technical result is a proof that a simple robot programming language is universal, in that any effectively achievable goal can be achieved by getting the robot to execute one of these robot programs. Among other things, this justifies a previous specification of the planning problem in the presence of sensing. This is joint work with Fangzhen Lin.
Description Logics are logics for representing and reasoning about classes of objects and their relationships. They can be seen as successors of frame systems and semantic networks, and have been investigated for more than a decade under different points of view, in particular, expressive power and computational complexity of reasoning. In the talk, I first review the research done in the past years in Description Logics. Then I discuss the relationships with other formalisms, such as modal logics, database models, and object-oriented languages. Finally, I describe how Description Logics have been applied in several fields, including software engineering, configuration management, databases, and information systems.
Go to KR Home
Page.
franconi@irst.itc.it Last modified: Tue Mar 17 09:29:19 MET 1998