John wrote: (01)
This is another example of heavy R
and little or no D. If I were
advising an engineer with a
limited budget and a tight deadline,
I'd suggest something else. (02)
Agreed. I prefer the solved labeling procedures
for And/Or search, with the "~" indicating
negation. In my search algorithm, I score up
evidence for and evidence against, keeping them
separate, and not letting one override the other.
Heuristics are good enough to identify which has
the preponderance of evidence in its favor. (03)
The more I read about Paraconsistent logic, the
less I like it. After reading enough, it seems to
me that the authors are simply justifying their
own work, without much reality behind it. (04)
-Rich (05)
Sincerely,
Rich Cooper
EnglishLogicKernel.com
Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com
9 4 9 \ 5 2 5 - 5 7 1 2 (06)
-----Original Message-----
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of John F Sowa
Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2014 9:18 AM
To: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Paraconsistent Logic (07)
Joel Luis, Rich, and Tara, (08)
Thanks for the references. (09)
JLC
> I think that I have found some applications... (010)
Yes, those are good examples of useful
applications. I did not
track down all the references, but the first one
contained the
comment "last, we state our future development of
EVALPSN for
defeasible deontic control." (011)
That confirms my suspicion that this is an
interesting research
area, but the applications are still exploratory
developments.
It's mostly R with wishful thinking about
practical D. (012)
RC
> Here is an article that explains the basic math:
>
> 3.3 On the Philosophy and Mathematics
> of the Logics of Formal Inconsistency
>
> which starts on page 19 of the following URL:
>
http://www.paraconsistency.org/book/Handbook-WCP5.
pdf (013)
The book covers a wide range of topics on
reasoning about inconsistency
by computers *and* by humans. (014)
It led me to a good survey article about methods
for combining logics:
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logic-combining/ (015)
This is another example of heavy R and little or
no D. If I were
advising an engineer with a limited budget and a
tight deadline,
I'd suggest something else. (016)
TA
> Based on the Stanford article, I would say that
that following
> all qualify as paraconsistent logics (emphasis
on the plural)
> * Defeasible Logics
> * Default Logics
> * Fuzzy Logics
> * Logic programming with negation as failure (017)
I agree that all of them are related ways of
addressing similar
problems. In fact, the article mentioned above
discusses the
relationship between EVALPSN and "conventional
logic programming". (018)
But these methods have been used in practical
applications for
over 3o years. Perhaps the theories of
paraconsistent logic may
provide a unified foundation for them. That would
be useful. (019)
> It appears that paraconsistent logics must be
non-monotonic.
> I think it is important to bear in mind that
paraconsistent
> is a characteristic that a logic can have, but
many different
> logics can have this characteristic. (020)
I agree. (021)
I would add belief revision as a method of
handling similar problems.
BR methods use metalevel reasoning about possibly
inconsistent FO
theories to produce a revised and consistent FO
theory. (022)
For a good 42-page intro and overview of belief
revision methods, (023)
Peppas, Pavlos (2008) Belief revision,
_Handbook of KR_,
http://pavlos.bma.upatras.gr/papers/8.pdf (024)
The advantage of belief (or theory) revision is
that the final
result is FOL, which can be represented and
implemented in a
wide range of well supported systems. (025)
John (026)
__________________________________________________
_______________
Message Archives:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-f
orum/
Unsubscribe:
mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePa
ge#nid1J (027)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J (028)
|