Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T06:31:11.913Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

9 - Reasoning and decision making

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 July 2014

By
Eyal Amir
Edited by
Keith Frankish  and
William M. Ramsey
Eyal Amir
Affiliation:
University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign
Keith Frankish
Affiliation:
The Open University, Milton Keynes
William M. Ramsey
Affiliation:
University of Nevada, Las Vegas
Get access

Summary

Introduction

Reasoning and decision making are fundamental parts of the Knowledge representation and reasoning (KR&R) AI approach. KR&R is devoted to the design, analysis, and implementation of inference algorithms and data structures. Work in KR&R has deep roots in reality: Reasoning problems arise naturally in many applications that interact with the world – commonsense query answering, diagnosis problem solving, planning, reasoning about knowledge in the sciences, natural language processing, and multi-agent control, to name a few. Aside from their obvious practical significance, reasoning algorithms and knowledge representations form the foundations for theoretical investigations into human-level AI.

Reasoning is the subfield of KR&R devoted to answering questions from diverse data without human intervention or help. Typically, the data is given in some formal system whose semantics is clear. In the early decades of focused research on automated reasoning and question answering (1950s onward) data was mostly akin to knowledge or our intuitions about it. More recently (from the 1980s), people assume that the data involved in reasoning are a mix of simple data and more complex data. The former take a low degree of computational complexity to process and are the focus of research on large databases (e.g., relational databases such as those recording sale transactions in businesses, accounting software for individuals, and records of stores’ items). The latter are given in a more expressive language, taking less space to represent, and correspond to both generalizations and finer-grained information.

Keywords

probabilistic reasoningknowledge representation and reasoninglogical reasoningcommonsense reasoningartificial intelligence approachautonomous decision making
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Artificial Intelligence , pp. 191 - 212
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2014

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Amir, E. and Engelhardt, B. (2003). Factored planning, in Proceedings of the 18th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI ’03), (pp. 929–35). San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
Amir, E. and McIlraith, S. (2005). Partition-based logical reasoning for first-order and propositional theories, Artificial Intelligence 162: 49–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buchanan, B. and Smith, R. (1988). Fundamentals of expert systems, Annual Review of Computer Science 3: 23–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chang, A. and Amir, E. (2006). Goal achievement in partially known, partially observable domains, in Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling (ICAPS’06) (pp. 203–11). Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press.Google Scholar
Cohn, A. G. (1997). Qualitative spatial representation and reasoning techniques, in Brewka, G., Habel, C., and Nebel, B., (eds.), KI-97, Advances in Artificial Intelligence, (pp. 1–30). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
de Salvo Braz, R., Amir, E., and Roth, D. (2006). MPE and partial inversion in lifted probabilistic variable elimination, in Proceedings of the 21st National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI ’06), vol. 2 (pp. 1123–30). Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press.Google Scholar
Even-Dar, E., Kakade, S. M., and Mansour, Y. (2005). Reinforcement learning in POMDPs, in Proceedings of the 19th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI ’05) (pp. 660–5). ICJAI.Google Scholar
Fagin, R., Halpern, J., Moses, Y., and Vardi, M. (1995). Reasoning About Knowledge. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Gabbay, D., Hogger, C., and Robinson, J. A. (eds.) (1993). Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming, vol. 3: Nonmonotonic Reasoning and Uncertain Reasoning. Oxford University Press.
Kaelbling, L. P., Littman, M. L., and Cassandra, A. R. (1998). Planning and acting in partially observable stochastic domains, Artificial Intelligence 101: 99–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kearns, M., Mansour, Y., and Ng, A. Y. (2000), Approximate planning in large POMDPs via reusable trajectories, in. Solla, S. A., Leen, T. K., and Müller, K-L. (eds.), Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 12 (pp. 1001–7). Cambridge MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kraus, S., Lehmann, D., and Magidor, M. (1990). Nonmonotonic reasoning, preferential models and cumulative logics, Artificial Intelligence 44: 167–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lavrač, N. and Džeroski, S. (1994). Inductive Logic Programming: Techniques and Applications. New York: Ellis Horwood.Google Scholar
Lenat, D. B. (1995). Cyc: A large-scale investment in knowledge infrastructure, Communications of the ACM 38(11): 33–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mancilla-Caceres, J. F. and Amir, E. (2011). Evaluating commonsense knowledge with a computer game, in Campos, P., Graham, N., Jorge, J., Nunes, N., Palanque, P., and Winckler, M (eds.), Proceedings of the 13th IFIP Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (INTERACT 2011) (pp. 348–55). Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manna, Z. and Pnueli, A. (1995). Temporal Verification of Reactive Systems: Safety. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matuszek, C., Witbrock, M., Kahlert, R. C., Cabral, J., Schneider, D., Shah, P., and Lenat, D. (2005). Searching for common sense: Populating cyc from the web, in Proceedings of the 20th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI’05), pp. 1430–5. AAAI.Google Scholar
McCarthy, J. (1958). Programs with common sense, in Mechanisation of Thought Processes, Proceedings of the Symposium of the National Physics Laboratory (pp. 77–84). London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.Google Scholar
McCarthy, J. (1986). Applications of circumscription to formalizing common sense knowledge, Artificial Intelligence 28: 89–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCarthy, J. and Hayes, P. J. (1969). Some philosophical problems from the standpoint of artificial intelligence, in Meltzer, B. and Michie, D. (eds.), Machine Intelligence 4 (pp. 463–502). Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Minsky, M. (1975). A framework for representing knowledge, in Winston, P. H. (ed.), The Psychology of Computer Vision (pp. 211–77). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Pentney, W., Philipose, M., Bilmes, J., and Kautz, H. (2007). Learning large scale common sense models of everyday life, in Proceedings of the 22nd National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI’07), vol. 1 (pp. 465–70). AAAI.Google Scholar
Pfeffer, A., Koller, D., Milch, B., and Takusagawa, K. T. (1999). SPOOK: A system for probabilistic object-oriented knowledge representation, in Laskey, K. and Prade, H. (eds.), Proceedings of the 15th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (UAI’99) (pp. 541–50). San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
Poole, D. (2003). First-order probabilistic inference, in Proceedings of the 18th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI ’03) (pp. 985–91). San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
Ramachandran, D., Reagan, P., and Goolsbey, K. (2005). First-orderized ResearchCyc: Expressivity and efficiency in a common-sense ontology, in Papers from the AAAI Workshop on Contexts and Ontologies: Theory, Practice and Applications (pp. 33–40), AAAI Technical Report WS-05-01.Google Scholar
Reiter, R. (2001). Knowledge in Action: Logical Foundations for Describing and Implementing Dynamical Systems. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Selman, B., Mitchell, D., and Levesque, H. (1997). Generating hard satisfiability problems, Artificial Intelligence 81: 17–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singh, P., Lin, T., Mueller, E. T., Lim, G., Perkins, T., and Zhu, W. L. (2002). Open mind common sense: Knowledge acquisition from the general public, in Proceedings of the First International Conference on Ontologies, Databases, and Applications of Semantics for Large Scale Information Systems, LNCS.
Tseitin, G. (1970). On the complexity of proofs in propositional logics, Seminars in Mathematics 8.Google Scholar
Williams, M-A., and Rott, H. (eds.) (2001). Frontiers in Belief Revision (Applied Logic Series 22). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRef

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×