Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,132

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 55 of the 55 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A truth maintenance system

Doyle, Jon·1979·Artificial Intelligence
DOI 10.1016/0004-3702(79)90008-0
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Abstract To choose their actions, reasoning programs must be able to make assumptions and subsequently revise their beliefs when discoveries contradict these assumptions. The Truth Maintenance System (TMS) is a problem solver subsystem for performing these functions by recording and maintaining the reasons for program beliefs. Such recorded reasons are useful in constructing explanations of program actions and in guiding the course of action of a problem solver. This paper describes (1) the representations and structure of the tms , (2) the mechanisms used to revise the current set of beliefs, (3) how dependency-directed backtracking changes the current set of assumptions, (4) techniques for summarizing explanations of beliefs, (5) how to organize problem solvers into “dialectically arguing” modules, (6) how to revise models of the belief systems of others, and (7) methods for embedding control structures in patterns of assumptions. We stress the need of problem solvers to choose between alternative systems of beliefs, and outline a mechanism by which a problem solver can employ rules guiding choices of what to believe, what to want, and what to do.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0004-3702(79)90008-0

Cites

55 of 55 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. Cox, 1977, Deduction plans: A graphical proof procedure for the first-order predicate calculus, Department of Computer Science, University of Waterloo, Research Report CS-77-28
  2. De Kleer, 1976, Local methods for localization of failures in electronic circuits, MIT AI Lab, Memo 394
  3. De Kleer, 1977, MIT AI Lab, Memo 427
  4. Doyle, 1978, Reflexive interpreters, MIT Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Ph.D. proposal
  5. Latombe, 1977, Une application de l'intelligence artificielle a la conception assistée par ordinateur (tropic), Université Scientifique et Médicale de Grenôble, Thesis D.Sc. Mathematiques
  6. Stansfield, 1978, Integrating truth maintenance systems with propagation of strength of belief as a means of addressing the fusion problem, MIT AI Lab., draft proposal
  7. Steele, 1978, Constraints, MIT AI Lab., Memo 502

Cited by

See all 1,132

Metadata

Authors
Doyle, J.
Venue
Artificial Intelligence
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1979-11
Volume
12
Issue
3
Pages
231-272
ISSN
0004-3702
DOI
10.1016/0004-3702(79)90008-0
Cited by
1,132
References
55
Language
en
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.