Temporal Semantics of Meta-Level Architectures for Dynamic Control of Reasoning

Research output: Chapter in Book / Report / Conference proceedingChapterAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

In the literature on meta-level architectures and reflection two separate streams can be distinguished: a logical stream (e.g., [Bowen and Kowalski, 1982], [Giunchiglia et al., 1993], [Weyhrauch, 1980]) and a procedural stream (e.g., [Clancey and Bock, 1988], [Davis, 1980]). Unfortunately there is a serious gap between the two streams. In the logical stream one restricts oneself often to static reflections; i.e., of facts the truth of which does not change during the reasoning: e.g., provable(A) (with A an object-level formula). In the procedural stream usually facts are reflected the truth of which changes during the whole reasoning pattern; e.g. control statements like currentgoal(A) with A an object-level formula, that are sometimes true and sometimes false during the reasoning. If applications to dynamic control of complex reasoning tasks are concerned these dynamic reflections are much more powerful (for applications see, e.g. [Davis, 1980], [Clancey and Bock, 1988], or [Brumsen et al., 1992], [Geelen and Kowalczyk, 1992], [Tan and Treur, 1992a1, [Tan and Treur, 1992b], [Treur, 1991a], [Treur and Veerkamp, 1992]). However, a logical basis for this is still lacking. The current paper provides a logical foundation (based on temporal logic) of meta-level architectures for dynamic control. Our logical framework enables one to study these dynamic meta-level architectures by logical means. It can be viewed as a contribution to bridge the gap between the logical stream and the procedural stream.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationDynamics and Management of Reasoning Processes
EditorsD Gabbay
PublisherKluwer Academic
Pages15-39
ISBN (Electronic)978-94-017-1743-4
ISBN (Print)978-90-481-5903-1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2001

Publication series

NameSeries in Defeasible Reasoning and Uncertainty Management Systems
Volume6

Fingerprint

Semantics
Temporal logic

Cite this

Treur, J. (2001). Temporal Semantics of Meta-Level Architectures for Dynamic Control of Reasoning. In D. Gabbay (Ed.), Dynamics and Management of Reasoning Processes (pp. 15-39). (Series in Defeasible Reasoning and Uncertainty Management Systems; Vol. 6). Kluwer Academic. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-1743-4_3
Treur, J. / Temporal Semantics of Meta-Level Architectures for Dynamic Control of Reasoning. Dynamics and Management of Reasoning Processes. editor / D Gabbay. Kluwer Academic, 2001. pp. 15-39 (Series in Defeasible Reasoning and Uncertainty Management Systems).
@inbook{aaff175a89c34cabab02cd531953e7fa,
title = "Temporal Semantics of Meta-Level Architectures for Dynamic Control of Reasoning",
abstract = "In the literature on meta-level architectures and reflection two separate streams can be distinguished: a logical stream (e.g., [Bowen and Kowalski, 1982], [Giunchiglia et al., 1993], [Weyhrauch, 1980]) and a procedural stream (e.g., [Clancey and Bock, 1988], [Davis, 1980]). Unfortunately there is a serious gap between the two streams. In the logical stream one restricts oneself often to static reflections; i.e., of facts the truth of which does not change during the reasoning: e.g., provable(A) (with A an object-level formula). In the procedural stream usually facts are reflected the truth of which changes during the whole reasoning pattern; e.g. control statements like currentgoal(A) with A an object-level formula, that are sometimes true and sometimes false during the reasoning. If applications to dynamic control of complex reasoning tasks are concerned these dynamic reflections are much more powerful (for applications see, e.g. [Davis, 1980], [Clancey and Bock, 1988], or [Brumsen et al., 1992], [Geelen and Kowalczyk, 1992], [Tan and Treur, 1992a1, [Tan and Treur, 1992b], [Treur, 1991a], [Treur and Veerkamp, 1992]). However, a logical basis for this is still lacking. The current paper provides a logical foundation (based on temporal logic) of meta-level architectures for dynamic control. Our logical framework enables one to study these dynamic meta-level architectures by logical means. It can be viewed as a contribution to bridge the gap between the logical stream and the procedural stream.",
author = "J. Treur",
year = "2001",
doi = "10.1007/978-94-017-1743-4_3",
language = "English",
isbn = "978-90-481-5903-1",
series = "Series in Defeasible Reasoning and Uncertainty Management Systems",
publisher = "Kluwer Academic",
pages = "15--39",
editor = "D Gabbay",
booktitle = "Dynamics and Management of Reasoning Processes",

}

Treur, J 2001, Temporal Semantics of Meta-Level Architectures for Dynamic Control of Reasoning. in D Gabbay (ed.), Dynamics and Management of Reasoning Processes. Series in Defeasible Reasoning and Uncertainty Management Systems, vol. 6, Kluwer Academic, pp. 15-39. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-1743-4_3

Temporal Semantics of Meta-Level Architectures for Dynamic Control of Reasoning. / Treur, J.

Dynamics and Management of Reasoning Processes. ed. / D Gabbay. Kluwer Academic, 2001. p. 15-39 (Series in Defeasible Reasoning and Uncertainty Management Systems; Vol. 6).

Research output: Chapter in Book / Report / Conference proceedingChapterAcademicpeer-review

TY - CHAP

T1 - Temporal Semantics of Meta-Level Architectures for Dynamic Control of Reasoning

AU - Treur, J.

PY - 2001

Y1 - 2001

N2 - In the literature on meta-level architectures and reflection two separate streams can be distinguished: a logical stream (e.g., [Bowen and Kowalski, 1982], [Giunchiglia et al., 1993], [Weyhrauch, 1980]) and a procedural stream (e.g., [Clancey and Bock, 1988], [Davis, 1980]). Unfortunately there is a serious gap between the two streams. In the logical stream one restricts oneself often to static reflections; i.e., of facts the truth of which does not change during the reasoning: e.g., provable(A) (with A an object-level formula). In the procedural stream usually facts are reflected the truth of which changes during the whole reasoning pattern; e.g. control statements like currentgoal(A) with A an object-level formula, that are sometimes true and sometimes false during the reasoning. If applications to dynamic control of complex reasoning tasks are concerned these dynamic reflections are much more powerful (for applications see, e.g. [Davis, 1980], [Clancey and Bock, 1988], or [Brumsen et al., 1992], [Geelen and Kowalczyk, 1992], [Tan and Treur, 1992a1, [Tan and Treur, 1992b], [Treur, 1991a], [Treur and Veerkamp, 1992]). However, a logical basis for this is still lacking. The current paper provides a logical foundation (based on temporal logic) of meta-level architectures for dynamic control. Our logical framework enables one to study these dynamic meta-level architectures by logical means. It can be viewed as a contribution to bridge the gap between the logical stream and the procedural stream.

AB - In the literature on meta-level architectures and reflection two separate streams can be distinguished: a logical stream (e.g., [Bowen and Kowalski, 1982], [Giunchiglia et al., 1993], [Weyhrauch, 1980]) and a procedural stream (e.g., [Clancey and Bock, 1988], [Davis, 1980]). Unfortunately there is a serious gap between the two streams. In the logical stream one restricts oneself often to static reflections; i.e., of facts the truth of which does not change during the reasoning: e.g., provable(A) (with A an object-level formula). In the procedural stream usually facts are reflected the truth of which changes during the whole reasoning pattern; e.g. control statements like currentgoal(A) with A an object-level formula, that are sometimes true and sometimes false during the reasoning. If applications to dynamic control of complex reasoning tasks are concerned these dynamic reflections are much more powerful (for applications see, e.g. [Davis, 1980], [Clancey and Bock, 1988], or [Brumsen et al., 1992], [Geelen and Kowalczyk, 1992], [Tan and Treur, 1992a1, [Tan and Treur, 1992b], [Treur, 1991a], [Treur and Veerkamp, 1992]). However, a logical basis for this is still lacking. The current paper provides a logical foundation (based on temporal logic) of meta-level architectures for dynamic control. Our logical framework enables one to study these dynamic meta-level architectures by logical means. It can be viewed as a contribution to bridge the gap between the logical stream and the procedural stream.

U2 - 10.1007/978-94-017-1743-4_3

DO - 10.1007/978-94-017-1743-4_3

M3 - Chapter

SN - 978-90-481-5903-1

T3 - Series in Defeasible Reasoning and Uncertainty Management Systems

SP - 15

EP - 39

BT - Dynamics and Management of Reasoning Processes

A2 - Gabbay, D

PB - Kluwer Academic

ER -

Treur J. Temporal Semantics of Meta-Level Architectures for Dynamic Control of Reasoning. In Gabbay D, editor, Dynamics and Management of Reasoning Processes. Kluwer Academic. 2001. p. 15-39. (Series in Defeasible Reasoning and Uncertainty Management Systems). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-1743-4_3