Relative Expressiveness of Defeasible Logics II
This work addresses foundational issues in non-monotonic reasoning for AI and logic communities, but it is incremental as it builds on existing definitions.
The paper tackled the problem of comparing the expressiveness of defeasible logics, showing that all logics in the DL framework are equally expressive under one definition, and that differences only arise from ambiguity handling, completing a prior study.
(Maher 2012) introduced an approach for relative expressiveness of defeasible logics, and two notions of relative expressiveness were investigated. Using the first of these definitions of relative expressiveness, we show that all the defeasible logics in the DL framework are equally expressive under this formulation of relative expressiveness. The second formulation of relative expressiveness is stronger than the first. However, we show that logics incorporating individual defeat are equally expressive as the corresponding logics with team defeat. Thus the only differences in expressiveness of logics in DL arise from differences in how ambiguity is handled. This completes the study of relative expressiveness in DL begun in \cite{Maher12}.