On Action Theory Change: Semantics For Contraction and Its Properties

On Action Theory Change:
Semantics for Contraction and its Properties
Ivan José Varzinczak
Knowledge Representation and Reasoning

Meraka Institute, CSIR
Pretoria, South Africa
Ivan José Varzinczak (KRR–Meraka) On Action Theory Change 1 / 29

Motivation

Motivation
Knowledge Base
A coffee is a hot drink
With a token I can buy coffee
After buying I have a hot drink
...

Motivation
¬t, c, h
b b
t, c, h b t, ¬c, h
¬t, ¬c, ¬h t, ¬c, ¬h ¬t, ¬c, h

Motivation
Observations
I have got a cold coffee
I cannot buy
I bought and I got no hot drink

Motivation
Observations
I have got a cold coffee
I cannot buy
I bought and I got no hot drink
Need for changing the laws about the behavior of actions

Motivation
¬t, c, h
b b
t, c, h b t, ¬c, h
¬t, ¬c, ¬h t, ¬c, ¬h ¬t, ¬c, h

Motivation
¬t, c, h c, ¬h
b b
t, c, h b t, ¬c, h
¬t, ¬c, ¬h t, ¬c, ¬h ¬t, ¬c, h

Motivation
¬t, c, h
b b
t, c, h b t, ¬c, h
¬t, ¬c, ¬h t, ¬c, ¬h ¬t, ¬c, h

Motivation
¬t, c, h
t, c, h b t, ¬c, h
¬t, ¬c, ¬h t, ¬c, ¬h ¬t, ¬c, h

Motivation
¬t, c, h
b b
t, c, h b t, ¬c, h
¬t, ¬c, ¬h t, ¬c, ¬h ¬t, ¬c, h

Motivation
¬t, c, h
b b
t, c, h b t, ¬c, h
b
¬t, ¬c, ¬h t, ¬c, ¬h ¬t, ¬c, h

Outline
1 Preliminaries
Action Theories
2 Contracting Action Laws

Semantics
Algorithms
Properties
3 Conclusion
Contributions
Future Work

Outline
1 Preliminaries
Action Theories

Semantics
Algorithms
Properties
3 Conclusion
Contributions
Future Work

Outline
1 Preliminaries
Action Theories

Semantics
Algorithms
Properties
3 Conclusion
Contributions
Future Work

Outline
1 Preliminaries
Action Theories

Semantics
Algorithms
Properties
3 Conclusion
Contributions
Future Work

Action Theories
Knowledge bases about the dynamics of the world
Actions
Effects
Preconditions
Usually 3 types of laws

Static laws : ‘a coffee is a hot drink’
Effect laws : ‘after buying I get a coffee’
Executability laws : ‘if I have a token, I can buy’
Reasoning tasks
Projection : ‘do I have a hot drink after I buy?’
Explanation : ‘I hold a coffee. I bought. Did I have a token?’
Planning : ‘how to get a hot drink?’
...
Action Theories
Actions
Effects
Preconditions

Reasoning tasks
...
Action Theories
Actions
Effects
Preconditions

Reasoning tasks
...
Action Theories in Multimodal Logic
Multimodal Logic
Propositional logic + modal operators
I [a] : every a-arrow
I hai : some a-arrow
Well defined semantics

I Possible worlds models
Expressive
I Actions, state constraints, nondeterminism
Decidable
I EXPTIME-complete, though
More elegant than FOL

Multimodal Logic

Expressive
Decidable

Multimodal Logic

Expressive
Decidable

Multimodal Logic

Expressive
Decidable

Multimodal Logic

Expressive
Decidable

Multimodal Logic

Expressive
Decidable

Possible worlds semantics: transition systems M = hW , R i
W : possible worlds
R : accessibility relations
a1
Satisfaction in a model
p, q
a1
p, ¬q q→p
p → [a1 ]¬q
a2
a1
p → ha1 i>
M : a1
p → ha2 i>
¬p, ¬q
(p ∧ ¬q) → [a2 ]⊥
a2

W : possible worlds
a1
p, q
a1
p, ¬q q→p
p → [a1 ]¬q
a2
a1
p → ha1 i>
M : a1
p → ha2 i>
¬p, ¬q
(p ∧ ¬q) → [a2 ]⊥
a2

W : possible worlds
a1
p, q
a1
p, ¬q q→p
p → [a1 ]¬q
a2
a1
p → ha1 i>
M : a1
p → ha2 i>
¬p, ¬q
(p ∧ ¬q) → [a2 ]⊥
a2

W : possible worlds
a1
p, q
a1
p, ¬q q→p "
p → [a1 ]¬q
a2
M : a1 a1 p → ha1 i>
p → ha2 i>
¬p, ¬q
(p ∧ ¬q) → [a2 ]⊥
a2

W : possible worlds
a1
p, q
a1
p, ¬q q→p "
a2
p → [a1 ]¬q "
M : a1 a1 p → ha1 i>
p → ha2 i>
¬p, ¬q
(p ∧ ¬q) → [a2 ]⊥
a2

W : possible worlds
a1
p, q
a1
p, ¬q q→p "
a2
"
p → [a1 ]¬q
M : a1 a1 p → ha i> "
1
p → ha2 i>
¬p, ¬q
(p ∧ ¬q) → [a2 ]⊥
a2

W : possible worlds
a1
p, q
a1
p, ¬q q→p "
a2
"
p → [a1 ]¬q
M : a1 a1 p → ha i> "
1
p → ha i> %
2
¬p, ¬q
(p ∧ ¬q) → [a2 ]⊥
a2

W : possible worlds
a1
p, q
a1
p, ¬q q→p "
a2
"
p → [a1 ]¬q
M : a1 a1 p → ha i> "
1
p → ha i> %
2
¬p, ¬q
(p ∧ ¬q) → [a2 ]⊥ "
a2

Example
Static Law: coffee → hot
Executability Law: token → hbuyi>
Effect Law: ¬coffee → [buy]coffee, ¬token → [buy]⊥, hot → [buy]hot
Definition
Action Theory T = S ∪ E ∪ X

Example
Static Law: coffee → hot
Executability Law: token → hbuyi>
Effect Law: ¬coffee → [buy]coffee, ¬token → [buy]⊥, hot → [buy]hot
Definition
Action Theory T = S ∪ E ∪ X

Example
 
coffee → hot, token → hbuyi>,

 

¬coffee → [buy]coffee, token → [buy]¬token,
 
T =S ∪E ∪X =

 ¬token → [buy]⊥, 

coffee → [buy]coffee, hot → [buy]hot
 
¬t, c, h
b b
M : t, c, h b t, ¬c, h
¬t, ¬c, ¬h t, ¬c, ¬h ¬t, ¬c, h

Example
 
coffee → hot, token → hbuyi>,

 

¬coffee → [buy]coffee, token → [buy]¬token,
 
T =S ∪E ∪X =

 ¬token → [buy]⊥, 

coffee → [buy]coffee, hot → [buy]hot
 
¬t, c, h
b b
M : t, c, h b t, ¬c, h
¬t, ¬c, ¬h t, ¬c, ¬h ¬t, ¬c, h

Outline
1 Preliminaries
Action Theories

Semantics
Algorithms
Properties
3 Conclusion
Contributions
Future Work

Intuitions about Model Contraction
Contracting a law
¬t, c, h
b b
M : t, c, h b t, ¬c, h
¬t, ¬c, ¬h t, ¬c, ¬h ¬t, ¬c, h
Make the law false in the model

Contracting coffee → hot
¬t, c, h
b b
M : t, c, h b t, ¬c, h
¬t, ¬c, ¬h t, ¬c, ¬h ¬t, ¬c, h
Make coffee ∧ ¬hot true in one world

¬t, c, h t, c, ¬h
b b
M : t, c, h b t, ¬c, h
¬t, ¬c, ¬h t, ¬c, ¬h ¬t, ¬c, h

¬t, c, ¬h ¬t, c, h
b b
M : t, c, h b t, ¬c, h
¬t, ¬c, ¬h t, ¬c, ¬h ¬t, ¬c, h

¬t, c, ¬h ¬t, c, h t, c, ¬h
b b
M : t, c, h b t, ¬c, h
¬t, ¬c, ¬h t, ¬c, ¬h ¬t, ¬c, h

Contracting a law
¬t, c, h
b b
M : t, c, h b t, ¬c, h
¬t, ¬c, ¬h t, ¬c, ¬h ¬t, ¬c, h

Contracting token → hbuyi>
¬t, c, h
b b
M : t, c, h b t, ¬c, h
¬t, ¬c, ¬h t, ¬c, ¬h ¬t, ¬c, h
Make token ∧ [buy]⊥ true in one world

¬t, c, h
M : t, c, h b t, ¬c, h
¬t, ¬c, ¬h t, ¬c, ¬h ¬t, ¬c, h

¬t, c, h
b b
M : t, c, h t, ¬c, h
¬t, ¬c, ¬h t, ¬c, ¬h ¬t, ¬c, h

¬t, c, h
M : t, c, h t, ¬c, h
¬t, ¬c, ¬h t, ¬c, ¬h ¬t, ¬c, h

Contracting a law
¬t, c, h
b b
M : t, c, h b t, ¬c, h
¬t, ¬c, ¬h t, ¬c, ¬h ¬t, ¬c, h

Contracting token → [buy]hot
¬t, c, h
b b
M : t, c, h b t, ¬c, h
¬t, ¬c, ¬h t, ¬c, ¬h ¬t, ¬c, h
Make token ∧ hbuyi¬hot true in one world

¬t, c, h
b b
M : t, c, h b t, ¬c, h
b
¬t, ¬c, ¬h t, ¬c, ¬h ¬t, ¬c, h

¬t, c, h
b b
M : t, c, h b t, ¬c, h
¬t, ¬c, ¬h t, ¬c, ¬h ¬t, ¬c, h

¬t, c, h
b b
M : t, c, h b t, ¬c, h
b b
b
¬t, ¬c, ¬h t, ¬c, ¬h ¬t, ¬c, h

Action Theory Change
Principles (Dalal, 1988)
Maintenance of Consistency "

Primacy of New Information "
Persistence of Prior Knowledge "
Fairness "
Irrelevance of Syntax +−
Assumptions in Reasoning about Actions (Shanahan, 1997)
Status of static laws "

Focus on the effect laws "
Executability laws: very difficult "

Fairness "


Fairness "


Fairness "

Choosing Models
Distance between models
Prefer models closest to the original one

Hamming/Dalal distance, etc
Distance dependent on the type of law retracted

Static law: look at the set of worlds
Action laws: look at the set of arrows
Definition
M 0 is as close to M as M 00 iff
either W −̇W 0 ⊆ W −̇W 00
or W −̇W 0 = W −̇W 00 and R −̇R 0 ⊆ R −̇R 00
Notation: M 0 M M 00

Choosing Models


Definition
or W −̇W 0 = W −̇W 00 and R −̇R 0 ⊆ R −̇R 00

Choosing Models


Definition
or W −̇W 0 = W −̇W 00 and R −̇R 0 ⊆ R −̇R 00

Choosing Models
Contracting ϕ
Definition
M 0 is a candidate iff
W ⊆ W0
R = R0
There is w ∈ W 0 falsifying ϕ
Take the models that are minimal w.r.t. M

Choosing Models
Contracting ϕ
Definition
W ⊆ W0
R = R0
There is w ∈ W 0 falsifying ϕ

Choosing Models
¬t, c, h t, c, ¬h ¬t, c, ¬h ¬t, c, h t, c, ¬h
b b b b
t, c, h b t, ¬c, h M t, c, h b t, ¬c, h
¬t, ¬c, ¬h t, ¬c, ¬h ¬t, ¬c, h ¬t, ¬c, ¬h t, ¬c, ¬h ¬t, ¬c, h

Choosing Models
¬t, c, h t, c, ¬h ¬t, c, ¬h ¬t, c, h
b b b b
t, c, h b t, ¬c, h t, c, h b t, ¬c, h
Incomparable

Choosing Models
Contracting ϕ → hai>
Definition
W0 = W
R0 ⊆ R
There is w ∈ W 0 falsifying ϕ → hai>

Choosing Models
Contracting ϕ → hai>
Definition
W0 = W
R0 ⊆ R
There is w ∈ W 0 falsifying ϕ → hai>

Choosing Models
¬t, c, h ¬t, c, h
t, c, h b t, ¬c, h M t, c, h t, ¬c, h

Choosing Models
¬t, c, h ¬t, c, h
b b b
t, c, h b t, ¬c, h t, c, h t, ¬c, h
Incomparable

Choosing Models
Contracting ϕ → [a]ψ
Definition
W0 = W
R ⊆ R0
If (w , w 0 ) ∈ R 0 \ R , then w 0 is a target (details in the JAIR paper)
There is w ∈ W 0 falsifying ϕ → [a]ψ

Choosing Models
Contracting ϕ → [a]ψ
Definition
W0 = W
R ⊆ R0
If (w , w 0 ) ∈ R 0 \ R , then w 0 is a target (details in the JAIR paper)
There is w ∈ W 0 falsifying ϕ → [a]ψ

Choosing Models
¬t, c, h ¬t, c, h
b b b b
t, c, h b t, ¬c, h M t, c, h b t, ¬c, h
b b

Choosing Models
¬t, c, h ¬t, c, h
b b b b
t, c, h b t, ¬c, h t, c, h b t, ¬c, h
b
Incomparable

Outline
1 Preliminaries
Action Theories

Semantics
Algorithms
Properties
3 Conclusion
Contributions
Future Work

Quick look: Algorithms
We have defined algorithms that contract T giving T 0
Theorem
The algorithms are correct w.r.t. our semantics (details in the JAIR paper)
Theorem
Complexity is exponential, though
Nevertheless
Theorem
The algorithms always terminate
Theorem
Size of T 0 is linear in that of T

Theorem
Theorem
Nevertheless
Theorem
Theorem

Theorem
Theorem
Nevertheless
Theorem
Theorem

Theorem
Theorem
Nevertheless
Theorem
Theorem

Outline
1 Preliminaries
Action Theories

Semantics
Algorithms
Properties
3 Conclusion
Contributions
Future Work

Properties
Monotonicity
T |= T 0
Preservation
If T 6|= α, then T ≡ T 0
Success
If T 6|= ⊥ and 6|= α, then T 0 6|= α

Properties
Monotonicity
T |= T 0
Preservation
Success
If T 6|= ⊥ and 6|= α, then T 0 6|= α

Properties
Monotonicity
T |= T 0
Preservation
Success
If T 6|= ⊥ and 6|= α, then T 0 6|= α

Properties
Equivalences
Contracting with equivalent formulas give the same result
Recovery
T 0 ∪ {α} |= T

Properties
Equivalences
Contracting with equivalent formulas give the same result
Recovery
T 0 ∪ {α} |= T

Outline
1 Preliminaries
Action Theories

Semantics
Algorithms
Properties
3 Conclusion
Contributions
Future Work

Contributions
Approach for action theory change
I Contraction: falsifying a law
I Revision: making a law valid (details in the NRAC’2009 paper)
Intuitive semantics
I Simple operations: add and remove
I Distance between models
I Minimal change
Syntactic operators (algorithms)

I Correct w.r.t. the semantics
Investigation on postulates for action theory change

Contributions
Intuitive semantics
I Minimal change


Contributions
Intuitive semantics
I Minimal change


Contributions
Intuitive semantics
I Minimal change


Outline
1 Preliminaries
Action Theories

Semantics
Algorithms
Properties
3 Conclusion
Contributions
Future Work

Future (rather outstanding) Work
More ‘orthodox’ approach to non-classical revision
I Other distances
I Representation result
Revision of general formulas

I Not only ϕ, ϕ → hai>, ϕ → [a]ψ
I More expressive logics: PDL
I Less expressive logics: Causal Theories of Action
Applications in Description Logics

I Ontology repair

I Other distances


I Ontology repair

I Other distances


I Ontology repair

Reference
I.J. Varzinczak. On Action Theory Change. Journal of Artificial
Intelligence Research (JAIR) vol. 37, 2010.
Thank you!

Reference
I.J. Varzinczak. On Action Theory Change. Journal of Artificial
Intelligence Research (JAIR) vol. 37, 2010.
Thank you!

On Action Theory Change: Semantics For Contraction and Its Properties

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

On Action Theory Change: Semantics For Contraction and Its Properties

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

On Action Theory Change:

Semantics for Contraction and its Properties

Ivan José Varzinczak

Knowledge Representation and Reasoning

Ivan José Varzinczak (KRR–Meraka) On Action Theory Change 1 / 29

Ivan José Varzinczak (KRR–Meraka) On Action Theory Change 2 / 29

Ivan José Varzinczak (KRR–Meraka) On Action Theory Change 2 / 29

¬t, ¬c, ¬h t, ¬c, ¬h ¬t, ¬c, h

Ivan José Varzinczak (KRR–Meraka) On Action Theory Change 2 / 29

Ivan José Varzinczak (KRR–Meraka) On Action Theory Change 2 / 29

Need for changing the laws about the behavior of actions

Ivan José Varzinczak (KRR–Meraka) On Action Theory Change 2 / 29

¬t, ¬c, ¬h t, ¬c, ¬h ¬t, ¬c, h

Need for changing the laws about the behavior of actions

Ivan José Varzinczak (KRR–Meraka) On Action Theory Change 2 / 29

¬t, ¬c, ¬h t, ¬c, ¬h ¬t, ¬c, h

Need for changing the laws about the behavior of actions

Ivan José Varzinczak (KRR–Meraka) On Action Theory Change 2 / 29

¬t, ¬c, ¬h t, ¬c, ¬h ¬t, ¬c, h

Need for changing the laws about the behavior of actions

Ivan José Varzinczak (KRR–Meraka) On Action Theory Change 2 / 29

¬t, ¬c, ¬h t, ¬c, ¬h ¬t, ¬c, h

Need for changing the laws about the behavior of actions

Ivan José Varzinczak (KRR–Meraka) On Action Theory Change 2 / 29

¬t, ¬c, ¬h t, ¬c, ¬h ¬t, ¬c, h

Need for changing the laws about the behavior of actions

Ivan José Varzinczak (KRR–Meraka) On Action Theory Change 2 / 29

Need for changing the laws about the behavior of actions

Ivan José Varzinczak (KRR–Meraka) On Action Theory Change 2 / 29

2 Contracting Action Laws

Ivan José Varzinczak (KRR–Meraka) On Action Theory Change 3 / 29

2 Contracting Action Laws

Ivan José Varzinczak (KRR–Meraka) On Action Theory Change 3 / 29

2 Contracting Action Laws

Ivan José Varzinczak (KRR–Meraka) On Action Theory Change 3 / 29

2 Contracting Action Laws

Ivan José Varzinczak (KRR–Meraka) On Action Theory Change 4 / 29

Usually 3 types of laws

Usually 3 types of laws

Usually 3 types of laws

Well defined semantics

More elegant than FOL

Ivan José Varzinczak (KRR–Meraka) On Action Theory Change 6 / 29

Well defined semantics

More elegant than FOL

Ivan José Varzinczak (KRR–Meraka) On Action Theory Change 6 / 29

Well defined semantics

More elegant than FOL

Ivan José Varzinczak (KRR–Meraka) On Action Theory Change 6 / 29

Well defined semantics

More elegant than FOL

Ivan José Varzinczak (KRR–Meraka) On Action Theory Change 6 / 29

Well defined semantics

More elegant than FOL

Ivan José Varzinczak (KRR–Meraka) On Action Theory Change 6 / 29

Well defined semantics

More elegant than FOL

Ivan José Varzinczak (KRR–Meraka) On Action Theory Change 6 / 29

Ivan José Varzinczak (KRR–Meraka) On Action Theory Change 7 / 29

Ivan José Varzinczak (KRR–Meraka) On Action Theory Change 7 / 29

Ivan José Varzinczak (KRR–Meraka) On Action Theory Change 7 / 29

Ivan José Varzinczak (KRR–Meraka) On Action Theory Change 7 / 29

Ivan José Varzinczak (KRR–Meraka) On Action Theory Change 7 / 29