Of the two types of pragmatic presuppositions to produce humor,i.e.,generation of pragmatic presuppositions and defeasibility of pragmatic presuppositions,the latter one receives particular attention because of its un...Of the two types of pragmatic presuppositions to produce humor,i.e.,generation of pragmatic presuppositions and defeasibility of pragmatic presuppositions,the latter one receives particular attention because of its unique humorous effect.Further analysis reveals that defeasibility occurs in context conflicts and in the deliberate interpretation of utterances’literal meaning by the listener.展开更多
The paper presents a flexible and effective method of development of negotiating agents. A strategy specification, which is specified by a state chart and defeasible rules, can be dynamically inserted into an agent sh...The paper presents a flexible and effective method of development of negotiating agents. A strategy specification, which is specified by a state chart and defeasible rules, can be dynamically inserted into an agent shell incorporating a state chart interpreter and a defeasible logic inference engine, in order to yield a desirable agent. The set of desirable criteria and rules is required to be justified with different context of the application. Key words automatic negotiation - intelligence agent - defeasible logic - state chart CLC number TP 391 Foundation item: Supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (60173051)Biography: WEI Ding-guo (1964-), male, Associate professor, research direction: computer network protocal etc.展开更多
Traditionally, the AI community assumes that a knowledge base must be consistent. Despite that, there are many applications where, due to the existence of rules with exceptions, inconsistent knowledge must be consider...Traditionally, the AI community assumes that a knowledge base must be consistent. Despite that, there are many applications where, due to the existence of rules with exceptions, inconsistent knowledge must be considered. One way of restoring consistency is to withdraw conflicting rules;however, this will destroy part of the knowledge. Indeed, a better alternative would be to give precedence to exceptions. This paper proposes a dialogue system for coherent reasoning with inconsistent knowledge, which resolves conflicts by using precedence relations of three kinds: explicit precedence relation, which is synthesized from precedence rules;implicit precedence relation, which is synthesized from defeasible rules;mixed precedence relation, which is synthesized by combining explicit and implicit precedence relations.展开更多
文摘Of the two types of pragmatic presuppositions to produce humor,i.e.,generation of pragmatic presuppositions and defeasibility of pragmatic presuppositions,the latter one receives particular attention because of its unique humorous effect.Further analysis reveals that defeasibility occurs in context conflicts and in the deliberate interpretation of utterances’literal meaning by the listener.
文摘The paper presents a flexible and effective method of development of negotiating agents. A strategy specification, which is specified by a state chart and defeasible rules, can be dynamically inserted into an agent shell incorporating a state chart interpreter and a defeasible logic inference engine, in order to yield a desirable agent. The set of desirable criteria and rules is required to be justified with different context of the application. Key words automatic negotiation - intelligence agent - defeasible logic - state chart CLC number TP 391 Foundation item: Supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (60173051)Biography: WEI Ding-guo (1964-), male, Associate professor, research direction: computer network protocal etc.
文摘Traditionally, the AI community assumes that a knowledge base must be consistent. Despite that, there are many applications where, due to the existence of rules with exceptions, inconsistent knowledge must be considered. One way of restoring consistency is to withdraw conflicting rules;however, this will destroy part of the knowledge. Indeed, a better alternative would be to give precedence to exceptions. This paper proposes a dialogue system for coherent reasoning with inconsistent knowledge, which resolves conflicts by using precedence relations of three kinds: explicit precedence relation, which is synthesized from precedence rules;implicit precedence relation, which is synthesized from defeasible rules;mixed precedence relation, which is synthesized by combining explicit and implicit precedence relations.
