A logic for hypothetical reasoning
Anthony J. Bonner · 1988
This paper shows that classical logic is inappropriate for hypothetical reasoning and develops an alternative logic for this purpose. The paper focuses on a form of hypothetical reasoning which appears computationally tractable. Specifically, Horn-clause logic is augmented with rules, called embedded implications, which can hypothetically add atomic formulas to a rulebase. By introducing the notion of rulebase independence, we show that these rules can express hypothetical queries which classical logic cannot; and by adopting methods from modal logic, we show these rules to be intuitionistic. In particular, they form a subset of intuitionistic logic having semantic properties similar to those of Horn-clause logic. This report is an expanded version of a paper published in the Proceedings of the Seventh National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, St. Paul, Minnesota, August 21--26 1988, American Association for Artificial Intelligence (AAAI). 1 Introduction Several researchers...