Logic-Based Modeling Approaches for Qualitative and Hybrid Reasoning in Dynamic Spatial Systems

被引:5
|
作者
Mitsch, Stefan [1 ]
Platzer, Andre [1 ]
Retschitzegger, Werner [2 ]
Schwinger, Wieland [2 ]
机构
[1] Carnegie Mellon Univ, Dept Comp Sci, Sch Comp Sci, Pittsburgh, PA 15213 USA
[2] Johannes Kepler Univ Linz, Dept Cooperat Informat Syst, A-4040 Linz, Austria
关键词
Languages; Theory; Algorithms Autonomous agents; logic-based reasoning; commonsense reasoning; dynamic reasoning; dynamic spatial systems; knowledge representation; hybrid systems; CONCEPTUAL NEIGHBORHOODS; SITUATION AWARENESS; CALCULUS; FRAMEWORK; BEAWARE; TIME;
D O I
10.1145/2764901
中图分类号
TP301 [理论、方法];
学科分类号
081202 ;
摘要
Autonomous agents that operate as components of dynamic spatial systems are becoming increasingly popular and mainstream. Applications can be found in consumer robotics, in road, rail, and air transportation, manufacturing, and military operations. Unfortunately, the approaches to modeling and analyzing the behavior of dynamic spatial systems are just as diverse as these application domains. In this article, we discuss reasoning approaches for the medium-term control of autonomous agents in dynamic spatial systems, which requires a sufficiently detailed description of the agent's behavior and environment but may still be conducted in a qualitative manner. We survey logic-based qualitative and hybrid modeling and commonsense reasoning approaches with respect to their features for describing and analyzing dynamic spatial systems in general, and the actions of autonomous agents operating therein in particular. We introduce a conceptual reference model, which summarizes the current understanding of the characteristics of dynamic spatial systems based on a catalog of evaluation criteria derived from the model. We assess the modeling features provided by logic-based qualitative commonsense and hybrid approaches for projection, planning, simulation, and verification of dynamic spatial systems. We provide a comparative summary of the modeling features, discuss lessons learned, and introduce a research roadmap for integrating different approaches of dynamic spatial system analysis to achieve coverage of all required features.
引用
下载
收藏
页数:40
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Logic-based Software Modeling with FOML
    Balaban, Mira
    Khitron, Igal
    Kifer, Michael
    JOURNAL OF OBJECT TECHNOLOGY, 2020, 19 (03): : 1 - 21
  • [32] A logic-based reasoning about PKI trust model
    El Bakkali, H
    Kaitouni, BI
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE SIXTH IEEE SYMPOSIUM ON COMPUTERS AND COMMUNICATIONS, 2001, : 42 - 48
  • [33] Modeling logic-based constraints in owl
    Kothari, CR
    Russomanno, DJ
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE IASTED INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND APPLICATIONS, VOLS 1AND 2, 2004, : 600 - 608
  • [34] Integer Programming and Logic-Based Modeling
    Fabry, Jan
    Pelikan, Jan
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE 21ST INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE MATHEMATICAL METHODS IN ECONOMICS 2003, 2003, : 54 - 60
  • [35] LOGIC-BASED MODELS OF ANALOGICAL REASONING - A FUNDAMENTAL BASIS FOR THE DESIGN OF LEGAL EXPERT SYSTEMS
    BAAZ, M
    QUIRCHMAYR, G
    EXPERT SYSTEMS WITH APPLICATIONS, 1992, 4 (04) : 369 - 378
  • [36] Constructing Meaningful Explanations: Logic-based Approaches
    State, Laura
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2022 AAAI/ACM CONFERENCE ON AI, ETHICS, AND SOCIETY, AIES 2022, 2022, : 916 - 916
  • [37] Checking consistency in hybrid qualitative spatial reasoning
    Sun, Haibin
    Li, Wenhui
    Zhang, Yong-jian
    COMPUTATIONAL METHODS, PTS 1 AND 2, 2006, : 1129 - +
  • [38] Postulates for logic-based argumentation systems
    Amgoud, Leila
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF APPROXIMATE REASONING, 2014, 55 (09) : 2028 - 2048
  • [39] Qualitative and Quantitative Reasoning in Hybrid Probabilistic Logic Programs
    Saad, Emad
    ISIPTA 07-PROCEEDINGS OF THE FIFTH INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON IMPRECISE PROBABILITY:THEORIES AND APPLICATIONS, 2007, : 375 - 384
  • [40] On the Equivalence of Logic-Based Argumentation Systems
    Amgoud, Leila
    Vesic, Srdjan
    SCALABLE UNCERTAINTY MANAGEMENT, 2011, 6929 : 123 - 136