NON-Monotonic Reasoning

Logic based systems are monotonic in nature i.e , if a proposition

is made which is true , it remains true under all circumstances. All
theorems are proved by this methodology only. But in real life , all
statements made do not necessarily mean that they are correct
under all circumstances.
Conventional Monotonic reasoning system, such as first
order predicate Logic works well when information is

1. Complete or all facts necessary to solve the

problem are present or can be derived by
conventional method.
2. It is consistent-
3. the only way it can change is that new facts can
be added if they are consistent with already existing
facts – monotonicty.

A monotonic reasoning system can not work effectively

in real life environments because:
 Information available is always incomplete.
 As process goes by situations change and so are the
solutions.
 Default assumptions are made in order to reduce the
search time and for quick arrival of solutions.
BASIC CONCEPTS OF NON-MONOTONIC
REASONING SYSTEMS
AI systems provide solutions for those problems whose facts and
rules of interface are explicitly stored in the database and
knowledge base. But as mentioned above the data and knowledge
are incomplete in nature and generally default assumptions are
made. For example, if we say that Rohini is a bird, the conclusion
that is arrived at(default) is that Rohini can fly. But on the other
hand, it is not necessary that Rohini should fly because of a variety
of reasons similar to those given below.

 Rohini could be an Ostrich.

 Rohini’s wings are broken.
 Rohini is too weak to fly.
 Rohini could be caged.
 Rohini could be a dead bird etc.

As one makes a statements like Rohini is a bird, people assume

that it can fly. If another statement like Rohini is an Ostrich ,
people retract the assumptions that were made.
Lot of day-to-day activities involve such instances wherein
assumptions that have been made are forced to be withdrawn by
the occurrence of an event or by getting a new piece of
information.

Why do humans make such assumptions as done in Rohini

example. The reason could be that they identify such statements
with the most likely characteristics of the object under
consideration. Based on the most likely characteristics one can
make some statements like the following:
 Indian Railways maintain punctually.
 Indian Airlines regularly operate their flights.
 Letters are delivered in time.
 Telephones are working properly and do cross-talks.
Non monotonic reasoning system are designed to solve
problems when these properties are missing
In real words the knowledge is often changing,
uncertain and Fuzzy. In tackling this situation,
following key issues;

1. How can knowledge base be expanded. How

inferences are to be drawn on presence of
knowledge and Lack of knowledge .

2. How can knowledge base be updated. When

facts are added or deleted, proofs of so many
statements become invalid.

3. How can knowledge base be used to help

conflicts when there are several inconsistent
inferences.

There are two commonly used system to tackle above

kind of problems.

1. NON- Monotonic reasoning: in which

axioms and/or and inference rules are extended
to reason with incomplete informations. Here
 state is either true or False or not believed to be
either of them.

2. Statistically Reasoning : Here a numeric

measures of certainty is assigned to each
statement ratherr than simply True or False with
statement.

In non –monotonic reasoning we draw conclusion

based on what is most Likely to be true. We assume all
those Facts to be true which are not proved to be untrue.
If you have no reason to believe some one did not
commit murder then he did not. This is called
DEFAULT reasoning. There are two ways:

NON – Monotonic Logic : Here we agument First

order predicate Logic with new operator M called
Model and is read as is consistent means undecidable.

2 V x, y Related(x , y) ^ MGet Along(x, y)→ will

defend (x, y) fact x get data y is consist with every then.

3 ^ P to be False does not imply P to be true. We draw

inferences in conventional way. If we come across
inconsistency then
V x : Republic(x) ^ M7 pacifist(x) → 7 pacifist(x)

V x : Quaker(x) ^ M pacifist(x) →pacifist(x)

Republic(Dick)
Quaker(Dick)
but taken together conflict.

=7pacifist(Dick) and Pacifist(Dick)

No conclusion about pacifist(Dick) can be made. To

resolve conflicts we take intersection of all theorem
proved.

Let us take another example

V x [Birds (x) & M fly(x) → fly (x)] (1)

That is , this axiom will hold good until it is possible for one to prove that x can not fly .
Let’s consider Eq. (1) again.

V x[Bird(x) & M fly(x) → fly (x)]

and

Bird(Rohini) (2)

From Eqs. (1) and (2) , we have fly (Rohini) because we can not prove that Rohini can
not fly .
Let’s add another axiom and see what happens.

V x [ostrich (x)→ ~ fly(x)] (3)

Addition of Eq . (3) does not have any impact and the original deduction fly (Rohini)
still holds good. If new information is added in Eq. (4)

Ostrich (Rohini) (4)

then fly(Rohini) can no longer be inferred. A simple addition of Eq . (4) makes the
system non-monotonic because the previously held inferences are no longer Vaild.

Dependency directed backtracking helps to a great deal in non-monotonic

reasoning systems. A non-monotonic system evades contraindication occurs when
the system finds that the new state discovered is inconsistent with the existing ones.
Auto epistemic Logic(more-1985) solves some of these
problem

Default Logic : -Reiter 1980)

A:B
C

If A is provable and is consist to assume B then

conclusion C different between Default Logic and
NML.

I. In DFL the new rules of inferences are basis of

computation, using them we give plausible
extension of knowledge base.

II. They are rules of inferences at can not be

manipulated by other rules.

Abduction

V x A(x) →B(x)

V x measles (x) →spot(x)

But spot(x) does not necessary imply measely(x) but it
can be a best guess. Such type of default reasoning is
called Abduction. We work in direction which is most
Likely to be true. We can attach certain measures to this
uncertainties.

Inheritence : we have already seen in baseball example

if a object belonging to some class has a attribute
explicitly mentioned otherwise it inherits that attribute
(if present) from a boarder class. How do we express in
Logic.

In default Logic

Baseball Player(x) : height(x , 6-1)

Height (x , 6-1)

To assert the fact that it does not inherit height from

adult male
Adult-Mali(x) : 7 baseball –Player(x) ^ height (x , 5-10)
Height (x , 5-10)
We may end up in

Adult male(x):
7baseballPlayer(x) ^7Midget(x)^7 Jockey(x) ^Height(x , 5-10)
Height(x , 5-10)

V x : Adult -male(x) ^7AB(x, aspect1) →height(x , 5-10)

V x : Baseball –Player(x)→AB(x, aspect)

V x : Midnight (x) → AB(x, aspect)

V x : Jockey (x) → AB(x, aspect)

:7 AB (x, y)
7 AB (x , y)
Non-monotonic reasoning systems are more complex than monotonic reasoning
systems. Monotonic reasoning systems gernerally do not provide facilities for
altering facts, deleting rules because it will have an adverse effect on the reasoning
process.