Implementation of a non ground meta interpreter for defeasible logic

Human reasoning is a fascinating and complex cognitive process that can be applied in different research areas such as philosophy, psychology, laws and financial. Unfortunately, developing supporting software (to those different areas) able to cope such as complex reasoning it’s difficult and requires a suitable logic abstract formalism. In this thesis we aim to develop a program, that has the job to evaluate a theory (a set of rules) w.r.t. a Goal, and provide some results such as “The Goal is derivable from the KB5 (of the theory)”. In order to achieve this goal we need to analyse different logics and choose the one that best meets our needs. In logic, usually, we try to determine if a given conclusion is logically implied by a set of assumptions T (theory). However, when we deal with programming logic we need an efficient algorithm in order to find such implications. In this work we use a logic rather similar to human logic. Indeed, human reasoning requires an extension of the first order logic able to reach a conclusion depending on not definitely true6 premises belonging to a incomplete set of knowledge. Thus, we implemented a defeasible logic7 framework able to manipulate defeasible rules. Defeasible logic is a non-monotonic logic designed for efficient defeasible reasoning by Nute (see Chapter 2). Those kind of applications are useful in laws area especially if they offer an implementation of an argumentation framework that provides a formal modelling of game. Roughly speaking, let the theory is the set of laws, a keyclaim is the conclusion that one of the party wants to prove (and the other one wants to defeat) and adding dynamic assertion of rules, namely, facts putted forward by the parties, then, we can play an argumentative challenge between two players and decide if the conclusion is provable or not depending on the different strategies performed by the players. Implementing a game model requires one more meta-interpreter able to evaluate the defeasible logic framework; indeed, according to Göedel theorem (see on page 127), we cannot evaluate the meaning of a language using the tools provided by the language itself, but we need a meta-language able to manipulate the object language8. Thus, rather than a simple meta-interpreter, we propose a Meta-level containing different Meta-evaluators. The former has been explained above, the second one is needed to perform the game model, and the last one will be used to change game execution and tree derivation strategies.

Analisi delle nozioni di dibattito e di incertezza in Wikidata

In questo elaborato si analizzano i principali metodi di rappresentazione delle nozioni di incertezza e di dibattito all’interno della Knowledge Base di Wikidata. In particolare, quali sono i metodi per rappresentare tali nozioni, quali tra questi metodi è il più utilizzato, quali offrono un'accuratezza maggiore (ovvero delle informazioni aggiuntive sulla motivazione del perché un determinato statement è in discussione) e infine la presenza di possibili correlazioni tra i vari metodi. Innanzitutto, è stato svolto uno studio preliminare volto a individuare tali metodi in Wikidata. In seguito, sono stati estratti e costruiti quattro dataset rappresentativi del dominio descritto che contenessero le rappresentazioni in esame. Ogni dataset, rappresentativo di un metodo di rappresentazione, è stato prima analizzato singolarmente e in seguito è stata ricercata la presenza degli altri metodi nello stesso. Infine sono stati presentati gli sviluppi futuri, i punti di forza e le debolezze del lavoro svolto.