A comparison between non-monotonic formalisms

Abstract

It is interesting and important to compare, analyze and assess the alternative tools that could be used in the area of Knowledge Representation. In this paper we present a reasearch line associated to this goal: to formally establish the relation among Knowledge Representation formalisms in order to make a sensible use of them. As a part of this main task, we present a comparison between Normal Default Theory and Defeasible Logic Programming. This comparison is achieved introducing a DELP variant, called DELP;, which allows to associate the answers of a DELP interpreter to the consequences, credulous and skeptical, of a Normal Default Theory.