Abstract
When we have to reason with an incomplete knowledge base that consists of facts and hypotheses, we first generate a set of facts and acceptable hypotheses, called a scenario, and then reason deductively from this scenario. In this case, which hypotheses to choose is an important problem. This paper considers a knowledge base with preferentially ordered hypotheses and proposes a method of generating scenarios based on this preferential partial order. The notion of conflict sets is introduced to represent inconsistency among hypotheses, and the scenario of the knowledge base is defined by these conflict sets and the preference relation. The semantics of the scenario is discussed, and the consistency of the scenario is shown. Finally, an algorithm for determining whether or not a ground sentence is deducible from the scenario is presented.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
