Abstract
An important problem in the management of knowledge-based systems is the handling of inconsistency. Inconsistency may appear because the knowledge may come from different sources of information. To solve this problem, two kinds of approaches have been proposed. The first category merges the different bases into a unique base, and the second category of approaches, such as argumentation, accepts inconsistency and copes with it.
Recently, a “powerful” approach [7,8,13] has been proposed to merge prioritized propositional bases encoded in possibilistic logic. This approach consists of combining prioritized knowledge bases into a new prioritized knowledge base, and then to infer from this.
In this paper, we present a particular argumentation framework for handling inconsistency arising from the presence of multiple sources of information. Then, we will show that this framework retrieves the results of the merging operator defined in [7,8,13]. Moreover, we will show that an argumentation-based approach palliates the limits, due to the drowning problem, of the merging operator.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Amgoud, L., Cayrol, C.: Inferring from inconsistency in preference-based argumentation frameworks. International Journal of Automated Reasoning 29(2), 125–169 (2002)
Amgoud, L., Cayrol, C.: A reasoning model based on the production of acceptable arguments. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 34, 197–216 (2002)
Amgoud, L., Kaci, S.: An argumentation framework for merging conflicting knowledge bases: The prioritized case. In: Technical report. Artois University, CRIL (2005)
Amgoud, L., Parsons, S.D.: An argumentation framework for meging conflicting knowledge bases. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Logics in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 27–37 (2002)
Amgoud, L., Prade, H.: Using arguments for making decisions. In: Proceedings of the 20th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 10–17 (2004)
Benferhat, S., Dubois, D., Cayrol, C., Lang, J., Prade, H.: Inconsistency management and prioritized syntax-based entailment. In: 13th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence IJCAI 1993, pp. 640–645 (1993)
Benferhat, S., Dubois, D., Kaci, S., Prade, H.: Possibilistic merging and distance-based fusion of propositional information. In: Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, vol. 34(1-3), pp. 217–252 (2002)
Benferhat, S., Dubois, D., Prade, H., Williams, M.: A practical approach to fusing and revising prioritized belief bases. In: Barahona, P., Alferes, J.J. (eds.) EPIA 1999. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1695, pp. 222–236. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)
Benferhat, S., Kaci, S.: Fusion of possibilistic knowledge bases from a postulate point of view. International Journal on Approximate Reasoning 33, 255–285 (2003)
Cholvy, L.: Reasoning about merging information. Handbook of Defeasible Reasoning and Uncertainty Management Systems 3, 233–263 (1998)
Dubois, D., Lang, J., Prade, H.: Possibilistic logic. In: Gabbay, D., et al. (eds.) Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming, vol. 3, pp. 439–513. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1994)
Dung, P.M.: On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Artificial Intelligence 77, 321–357 (1995)
Kaci, S.: Connaissances et Préférences: Représentation et fusion en logique possibiliste. Thèse de doctorat. Université Paul Sabatier. Toulouse (2002)
Konieczny, S., Pino Pérez, R.: On the logic of merging. In: Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR 1998), Trento, pp. 488–498 (1998)
Lang, J.: Possibilistic logic: Complexity and algorithms. In: Handbook of Defeasible Reasoning and Uncertainty Management Systems, vol. 5, pp. 179–220 (2000)
Lin, J.: Integration of weighted knowledge bases. Artificial Intelligence 83, 363–378 (1996)
Lin, J., Mendelzon, A.: Merging databases under constraints. International Journal of Cooperative Information Systems 7(1), 55–76 (1998)
Prakken, H., Sartor, G.: Argument-based extended logic programming with defeasible priorties. Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics 7, 25–75 (1997)
Qi, G., Liu, W., Glass, D.H.: Combining individually inconsistent prioritized knowledge bases. In: Proceedings of the international workshop on non-monotonic reasoning (2004)
Rescher, N., Manor, R.: On inference from inconsistent premises. Theory and Decision 1, 179–219 (1970)
Revesz, P.Z.: On the semantics of theory change: arbitration between old and new information. In: 12th ACM SIGACT-SIGMOD-SIGART symposium on Principles of Databases, pp. 71–92 (1993)
Zadeh, L.: Fuzzy sets as a basis for a theory of possibility. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 1, 3–28 (1978)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2005 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Amgoud, L., Kaci, S. (2005). An Argumentation Framework for Merging Conflicting Knowledge Bases: The Prioritized Case. In: Godo, L. (eds) Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty. ECSQARU 2005. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 3571. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/11518655_45
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/11518655_45
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-27326-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-31888-0
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)