Summary of Know Your Exceptions: Towards An Ontology Of Exceptions in Knowledge Representation, by Gabriele Sacco et al.
Know your exceptions: Towards an Ontology of Exceptions in Knowledge Representation
by Gabriele Sacco, Loris Bozzato, Oliver Kutz
First submitted to arxiv on: 1 Mar 2024
Categories
- Main: Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
- Secondary: None
GrooveSquid.com Paper Summaries
GrooveSquid.com’s goal is to make artificial intelligence research accessible by summarizing AI papers in simpler terms. Each summary below covers the same AI paper, written at different levels of difficulty. The medium difficulty and low difficulty versions are original summaries written by GrooveSquid.com, while the high difficulty version is the paper’s original abstract. Feel free to learn from the version that suits you best!
| Summary difficulty | Written by | Summary |
|---|---|---|
| High | Paper authors | High Difficulty Summary Read the original abstract here |
| Medium | GrooveSquid.com (original content) | Medium Difficulty Summary This paper proposes a framework for comparing formalisms used in defeasible reasoning, a type of reasoning where general conclusions may not be valid in all circumstances. Defeasible reasoning is characteristic of common-sense contexts and has been modeled using various formalisms. However, choosing the best-fit formalism for a domain from an ontological perspective can be challenging. The proposed framework is based on notions of exceptionality and defeasibility, enabling the comparison of formalisms and their ontological commitments. The authors apply this framework to compare four systems, highlighting differences in their ontological perspectives. This work has implications for modeling common-sense reasoning and understanding the strengths and limitations of different formalisms. |
| Low | GrooveSquid.com (original content) | Low Difficulty Summary This paper is about a way to compare different systems used in a kind of thinking called defeasible reasoning. Defeasible reasoning is when we realize that some general rules might not apply all the time. The authors want to help people choose the best system for their area of study by creating a framework that shows how each system works and what it assumes about the world. They use this framework to compare four different systems, showing how they are similar or different. This research is important because it can help us understand how we think and make better decisions. |
