Weakening Conflicting Information for Iterated Revision and Knowledge Integration

نویسندگان

  • Salem Benferhat
  • Souhila Kaci
  • Daniel Le Berre
  • Mary-Anne Williams
چکیده

The ability to handle exceptions, to perform iterated belief revision and to integrate information from multiple sources are essential skills for an intelligent agent. These important skills are related in the sense that they all rely on resolving inconsistent information. We develop a novel and useful strategy for conflict resolution, and compare and contrast it with existing strategies. Ideally the process of conflict resolution should conform with the principle of Minimal Change and should result in the minimal loss of information. Our approach to minimizing the loss of information is to weaken information involved in conflicts rather than completely removing it. We implemented and tested the relative performance of our new strategy in three different ways. We show that it retains more information than the existing Maxi-Adjustment strategy at no extra computational cost. Surprisingly, we are able to demonstrate that it provides a computationally effective compilation of the lexicographical strategy, a strategy which is known to have desirable theoretical properties.

برای دانلود رایگان متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

Ontology Revision Through Concept Contraction

Belief revision deals with the question how to integrate conflicting information into a knowledge base. Classical belief revision thereby presumes that the information has a single interpretation. In relaxing this presumption — as usually done in the field of semantic integration — it is investigated how to handle the problem of integrating information α into an ontology O, if the (multiple) in...

متن کامل

Three Scenarios for the Revision of Epistemic States

This position paper discusses the difficulty of interpreting iterated belief revision in the scope of the existing literature. Axioms of iterated belief revision are often presented as extensions of the AGM axioms, upon receiving a sequence of inputs. More recent inputs are assumed to have priority over less recent ones. We argue that this view of iterated revision is at odds with the claim, ma...

متن کامل

A conceptual framework for (iterated) revision, update, and nonmonotonic reasoning

This paper makes a foundational contribution to the discussions on the very nature of belief change operations. Belief revision and belief update are investigated within an abstract framework of epistemic states and (qualitative or quantitative) conditionals. Moreover, we distinguish between background knowledge and contextual information in order to analyse belief change more appropriately. Th...

متن کامل

Semantische Integration durch Reinterpretation: ein formales Modell

This work presents a formal model for integrating heterogeneous knowledge sources which relies on the principle of reinterpretation. Conflicts occurring in the integration are resolved with a conservative strategy in which symbols involved in a conflict get a new interpretation; the result contains hypothesis on the semantical relatedness of the different readings of the conflict symbols. The f...

متن کامل

Multiple Iterated Belief Revision Without Independence

Multiple iterated revision needs advanced belief revision techniques beyond the classical AGM theory that are able to integrate several (propositional) pieces of new information into epistemic states. A crucial feature of this kind of revision is that the multiple pieces of information should be dealt with separately, which has usually been understood as requiring some kind of independence amon...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

عنوان ژورنال:

دوره   شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 2001