Towards a comparison criteria for CDeLP

Abstract

The development of systems with the ability to reason about change notion and actions has been of great importance for the artificial intelligence community. The definition and implementation of systems capable of managing defeasible, incomplete, unreliable, or uncertain information has been also an area of much interest. With a few exceptions research on these two ways of reasoning was independently pursued. Nevertheless, they are complementary and closely related, since many applications that deal with defeasible information also depends on the occurrence of events and time. DeLP is an argumentative system appropriate for commonsense reasoning. The defeasible argumentation basis of DeLP allows to build applications that deal with incomplete and contradictory information in dynamic domains. Thus, the resulting approach is suitable for representing agent’s knowledge and for providing an argumentation based reasoning mechanism for that agent (see for example [6, 1]). It is interesting to extend this system adding mechanisms to manage events and time as CDeLP [7]. Here we analyze how to develop a comparison criteria for arguments built up from causal information and considers commonsense rules of inertia.