TY  - JOUR
A1  - Delgrande, James Patrick
A1  - Schaub, Torsten
A1  - Tompits, Hans
T1  - A Preference-Based Framework for Updating logic Programs : preliminary reports
Y1  - 2006
UR  - http://www.easychair.org/FLoC-06/PREFS-preproceedings.pdf
ER  - 
TY  - JOUR
A1  - Delgrande, James Patrick
A1  - Schaub, Torsten
A1  - Tompits, Hans
A1  - Wang, Kewen
T1  - A classification and survey of preference handling approchaches in nonmonotonic reasoning
N2  - In recent years, there has been a large amount of disparate work concerning the representation and reasoning with qualitative preferential information by means of approaches to nonmonotonic reasoning. Given the variety of underlying systems, assumptions, motivations, and intuitions, it is difficult to compare or relate one approach with another. Here, we present an overview and classification for approaches to dealing with preference. A set of criteria for classifying approaches is given, followed by a set of desiderata that an approach might be expected to satisfy. A comprehensive set of approaches is subsequently given and classified with respect to these sets of underlying principles
Y1  - 2004
SN  - 0824-7935
ER  - 
TY  - JOUR
A1  - Delgrande, James Patrick
A1  - Schaub, Torsten
A1  - Tompits, Hans
A1  - Wang, Kewen
T1  - Towards a classification of preference handling approaches in nonmonotonic reasoning
Y1  - 2002
SN  - 1-577-35166-5
ER  - 
TY  - JOUR
A1  - Delgrande, James Patrick
A1  - Schaub, Torsten
A1  - Tompits, Hans
A1  - Woltran, Stefan
T1  - On computing solutions to belief change scenarios
Y1  - 2001
SN  - 3-540- 42464-4
ER  - 
TY  - JOUR
A1  - Delgrande, James Patrick
A1  - Schaub, Torsten
A1  - Tompits, Hans
A1  - Woltran, Stefan
T1  - On Computing belief change operations using quantifield boolean formulas
N2  - In this paper, we show how an approach to belief revision and belief contraction can be axiomatized by means of quantified Boolean formulas. Specifically, we consider the approach of belief change scenarios, a general framework that has been introduced for expressing different forms of belief change. The essential idea is that for a belief change scenario (K, R, C), the set of formulas K, representing the knowledge base, is modified so that the sets of formulas R and C are respectively true in, and consistent with the result. By restricting the form of a belief change scenario, one obtains specific belief change operators including belief revision, contraction, update, and merging. For both the general approach and for specific operators, we give a quantified Boolean formula such that satisfying truth assignments to the free variables correspond to belief change extensions in the original approach. Hence, we reduce the problem of determining the results of a belief change operation to that of satisfiability. This approach has several benefits. First, it furnishes an axiomatic specification of belief change with respect to belief change scenarios. This then leads to further insight into the belief change framework. Second, this axiomatization allows us to identify strict complexity bounds for the considered reasoning tasks. Third, we have implemented these different forms of belief change by means of existing solvers for quantified Boolean formulas. As well, it appears that this approach may be straightforwardly applied to other specific approaches to belief change
Y1  - 2004
SN  - 0955-792X
ER  -