As an important variant of Relier's default logic, Poole (1988) developed a nonmonotonic reasoning framework in the classical first-order language. Brewka and Nebel extended Poole's approach in order to enabl...As an important variant of Relier's default logic, Poole (1988) developed a nonmonotonic reasoning framework in the classical first-order language. Brewka and Nebel extended Poole's approach in order to enable a representation of priorities between defaults. In this paper a general framework for default reasoning is presented, which can be viewed as a generalization of the three approaches above. It is proved that the syntax-independent default reasoning in this framework is identical to the general belief revision operation introduced by Zhang et al. (1997). This result provides a solution to the problem whether there is a correspondence between belief revision and default logic for the infinite case. As a by-product, an answer to the question, raised by Mankinson and Gardenfors (1991), is also given about whether there is a counterpart contraction in nonmonotonic logic.展开更多
基金This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No.69785004) and the Science and Technology Fundin
文摘As an important variant of Relier's default logic, Poole (1988) developed a nonmonotonic reasoning framework in the classical first-order language. Brewka and Nebel extended Poole's approach in order to enable a representation of priorities between defaults. In this paper a general framework for default reasoning is presented, which can be viewed as a generalization of the three approaches above. It is proved that the syntax-independent default reasoning in this framework is identical to the general belief revision operation introduced by Zhang et al. (1997). This result provides a solution to the problem whether there is a correspondence between belief revision and default logic for the infinite case. As a by-product, an answer to the question, raised by Mankinson and Gardenfors (1991), is also given about whether there is a counterpart contraction in nonmonotonic logic.
