LiU Electronic Press
Full-text not available in DiVA
Doherty, Patrick (Linköping University, The Institute of Technology) (Linköping University, Department of Computer and Information Science, KPLAB - Knowledge Processing Lab)
PMON+: A fluent logic for action and change - formal specification, version 1.0.
Linköping University, Department of Computer and Information Science, KPLAB - Knowledge Processing Lab
Linköping University, The Institute of Technology
Publication type:
Report (Other academic)
Place of publ.: Linköping, Sweden Publisher: Department of Computer and Information Science, Linköping University
LITH-IDA-R, ISSN 0281-4250; 33
Year of publ.:
Permanent link:
Local ID:
Subject category:
Computer Science
SVEP category:
Computer science
Abstract(en) :

This report describes the current state of work with PMON, a logic for reasoning about action and change, and its extensions. PMON has been assessed correct for the K-IA class using Sandewall's Features and Fluents framework which provides tools for assessing the correctness of logics of action and change. A syntactic characterization of PMON has previously been provided in terms of a circumscription axiom which is shown to be reducible to a first-order formula. This report introduces a number of new extensions which are also reducible and deal with ramification. The report is intended to provide a formal specification for the PMON family of logics and the surface language L(SD) used to represent action scenario descriptions. It should be considered a working draft. The title of the report has a version number because both the languages and logics used are continually evolving. Since this document is intended as a formal specification which is used by our group as a reference for research and implementation, it is understandably brief as regards intuitions and applications of the languages and logics defined. We do provide a set of benchmarks and comments concerning these which can serve as a means of comparing this formalism with others. The set of benchmarks is not complete and is only intended to provide representative examples of the expressivity and use of this particular family of logics. We describe its features and limitations in other publications by our group which can normally be found at "".

Available from:
Last updated:
22 hits