Consistent Belief Reasoning in the Presence of Inconsistency
نویسنده
چکیده
Since everything is a consequence of an inconsistency, classical logics are not useful in modeling the reasoning of an agent who has inconsistent beliefs. In this paper, we differentiate consistent beliefs from inconsistent beliefs. We propose two belief operators B c and B, standing for consistent belief and belief, respectively. B c has the modus ponens property, by which the agent is able to reason with consistent beliefs as normal and draw consistent conclusions. B tolerates inconsistency, and by B the agent can reason about his inconsistent beliefs as well. The concept of consistent belief and our logical formalism for it are new, in that reasoning consistently about the information in an inconsistent knowledge base is possible. We also present a complete axiomatization for the logic and discuss the application of B c and B in reasoning about implicit knowledge in a group of agents and eliminating inconsistency from a knowledge base.
منابع مشابه
Reasoning under inconsistency: the forgotten connective
In many frameworks for reasoning under inconsistency, it is implicitly assumed that the formulae from the belief base are connected using a weak form of conjunction. When it is consistent, a belief base B = {φ1, . . . , φn}, where the φi are propositional formulae, is logically equivalent to the base {φ1 ∧ . . . ∧ φn}. However, when it is not consistent, both bases typically lead to different c...
متن کاملReasoning with Misperception in the Features and Fluents Framework
In this paper we consider a way to deal with the problem of misperception when an agent is reasoning about dynamical systems as they are formalized and systematically studied in Sandewall's approach to reasoning about action and change. The presence of misperception can be detected in case it generates a contradiction. In this case a revision function resolves the inconsistency by constructing ...
متن کاملInconsistency Management and Prioritized Syntax-Based Entailment
The idea of ordering plays a basic role in commonsense reasoning for addressing three interrelated tasks: inconsistency handling, belief revision and plausible inference. We study the behavior of non-monotonic inferences induced by various methods for priority-based handling of inconsistent sets of classical formulas. One of them is based on a lexicographic ordering of maximal consistent subset...
متن کاملA Reasoning Platform Based on the MI Shapley Inconsistency Value
In this paper we show how to build a reasoning platform using an inconsistency value. The idea is to use an inconsistency value for evaluating how much each formula of the belief base is responsible of the inconsistency of the base. Then this evaluation allows us to obtain a stratification (total pre-order) of the base, that can be used as the preferential input for different reasoning tasks, s...
متن کاملReasoning About Requirements Evolution Using Clustered Belief Revision
During the development of system requirements, software system specifications are often inconsistent. Inconsistencies may arise for different reasons, for example, when multiple conflicting viewpoints are embodied in the specification, or when the specification itself is at a transient stage of evolution. These inconsistencies cannot always be resolved immediately. As a result, we argue that a ...
متن کامل