Sure. Ruth Kempson did some early work in linguistics/nlp using labelled
deduction: (01)
Finger, Marcelo; Rodger Kibble; Dov Gabbay; Ruth Kempson. 1997. Parsing Natural
Language Using LDS: a
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.27.1968&rep=rep1&type=pdf. (02)
I had also mentioned this before:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/2012-08/msg00020.html. (03)
Thanks,
Leo (04)
>-----Original Message-----
>From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-
>bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rich Cooper
>Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2014 3:41 PM
>To: '[ontolog-forum] '
>Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Paraconsistent Logic
>
>Thanks Leo and John,
>
>The phrase "Labeled Deductive Systems" sounds very
>interesting, but the Gabbay book costs $50 used.
>PDFs I found covered the topic but only in the
>math, nothing intuitive in the way of explaining
>the what how and why of labeled deductive systems.
>
>
>There seems to be a dual system in play, one
>called the Labels and the other the deduction
>rules. That reminds me of the Link Grammar
>Parser, which applies at least two layers of
>labels to its syntax rules and matches the labels
>against other labels stored as properties of the
>language's vocabulary.
>
>So with only the LGP as the exemplar, can anyone
>shed some more light on why how and what you would
>use a labeled deductive system for?
>
>-Rich
>
>Sincerely,
>Rich Cooper
>EnglishLogicKernel.com
>Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com
>9 4 9 \ 5 2 5 - 5 7 1 2
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
>Behalf Of Obrst, Leo J.
>Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2014 12:09 PM
>To: [ontolog-forum]
>Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Paraconsistent Logic
>
>John,
>
>RE: combining logics, you might also look at
>Labelled Deduction, which when pushed into the
>object language is a so-called "Hybrid Logic"
>[1-4], i.e., an extended modal logic.
>
>One might even consider IKL similar to a hybrid
>logic, I guess, as Pat Hayes suggests [5].
>
>[1] Gabbay, Dov. 1996. Labelled Deductive Systems;
>Principles and Applications. Vol 1: Introduction.
>Oxford University Press.
>
>[2] Blackburn, Patrick. 1999. Internalizing
>Labelled Deduction. In Proceedings of Hylo'99,
>First International Workshop on Hybrid Logics.
>July 13th, 1999, Saarbrücken, Germany. Published
>in Journal of Logic and Computation, 2000
>10(1):137-168.
>
>[3] Hybrid Logic.
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_logic.
>
>[4] Hybrid Logic.
>http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logic-hybrid/.
>
>[5] Hayes, Pat. Contexts and modalities in IKL.
>http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes/IKL/GUIDE/GUIDE.ht
>ml#ContextsModalities.
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>[mailto:ontolog-forum-
>>bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John F
>Sowa
>>Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2014 12:18 PM
>>To: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Paraconsistent Logic
>>
>>Joel Luis, Rich, and Tara,
>>
>>Thanks for the references.
>>
>>JLC
>>> I think that I have found some applications...
>>
>>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."
>>
>>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.
>>
>>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
>>
>>The book covers a wide range of topics on
>reasoning about inconsistency
>>by computers *and* by humans.
>>
>>It led me to a good survey article about methods
>for combining logics:
>>http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logic-combining
>/
>>
>>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.
>>
>>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
>>
>>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".
>>
>>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.
>>
>>> 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.
>>
>>I agree.
>>
>>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.
>>
>>For a good 42-page intro and overview of belief
>revision methods,
>>
>> Peppas, Pavlos (2008) Belief revision,
>_Handbook of KR_,
>> http://pavlos.bma.upatras.gr/papers/8.pdf
>>
>>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.
>>
>>John
>>
>>_________________________________________________
>________________
>>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
>>
>
>__________________________________________________
>_______________
>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
>
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>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
> (05)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (06)
|