Contextual Reasoning
Contextual Reasoning
复制标题
情境推理
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
1998
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Laurent Perrussel
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Laurent Perrussel
人们普遍认为，大多数认知过程都是语境化的，因为它们依赖于环境或语境，在这个意义上，它们是在其中进行的。即使集中在推理的语境性问题上，也可以在人工智能文献中找到许多不同的语境概念，例如[Giunchiglia 1991 a，Giunchiglia & Weyhrauch 1988，Guha 1990，Guha & Lenat 1990，Shoham 1991，McCarthy 1990 b]。我们的直觉是，推理通常是在全局知识库的一个子集上进行的;我们从不考虑我们所知道的一切，而只考虑其中的一个非常小的子集。粗略地说，我们认为上下文是用于证明给定目标的局部事实集，加上用于推理它们的推理例程（通常对于不同的事实集是不同的）。我们的观点与[McCarthy 1990 b，McCarthy 1991]中提出的观点相似。本文的目的是提出一个认识论上适当的推理与上下文的理论。重点是动机和直觉，而不是技术细节。这两个基本定义载于附录A。随着详细程度的增加，想法被逐步描述。因此，第2节描述了为什么上下文是我们本体论的一个重要概念。这也是通过将语境与情境进行比较来实现的，情境是另一个本体论上非常重要的概念。第3节然后进入更多的技术细节，并提出，上下文应该形式化为特定的数学对象，即作为逻辑理论。然后，用上下文进行推理被形式化为一组演绎，每个演绎都在上下文中进行，并通过适当的“桥规则”连接起来。最后，第4节描述了常识推理的一个重要例子，关于推理的推理，可以形式化为多上下文推理。
It is widely agreed on that most cognitive processes are contextual in the sense that they depend on the environment, or context, inside which they are carried on. Even concentrating on the issue of contextuality in reasoning, many different notions of context can be found in the Artificial Intelligence literature, see for instance [Giunchiglia 1991a, Giunchiglia & Weyhrauch 1988, Guha 1990, Guha & Lenat 1990, Shoham 1991, McCarthy 1990b]. Our intuition is that reasoning is usually performed on a subset of the global knowledge base; we never consider all we know but only a very small subset of it. The notion of context is used as a means of formalizing this idea of localization. Roughly speaking, we take a context to be the set of facts used locally to prove a given goal plus the inference routines used to reason about them (which in general are different for different sets of facts). Our perspective is similar to that proposed in [McCarthy 1990b, McCarthy 1991]. The goal of this paper is to propose an epistemologically adequate theory of reasoning with contexts. The emphasis is on motivations and intuitions, rather than on technicalities. The two basic definitions are reported in appendix A. Ideas are described incrementally with increasing level of detail. Thus, section 2 describes why contexts are an important notion to consider as part of our ontology. This is achieved also by comparing contexts with situations, another ontologically very important concept. Section 3 then goes more into the technical details and proposes that contexts should be formalized as particular mathematical objects, namely as logical theories. Reasoning with contexts is then formalized as a set of deductions, each deduction carried out inside a context, connected by appropriate "bridge rules". Finally, section 4 describes how an important example of common sense reasoning, reasoning about reasoning, can be formalized as multicontextual reasoning.