Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
SpringerLink
Log in

A Priori Revision

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty (ECSQARU 2001)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 2143))

  • 738 Accesses

Abstract

The problem of revision is to find which formula Ψ can be deduced from a formula φ, which has been added to a Knowledge Base KB. Since φ can bring inconsistency to KB, non-monotonic inference relations which are able to deal with inconsistency have been proposed; note that classical revision takes place after the arrival of φ The aim of this paper is to propose a priori revision, that is to provide a way to “armor” the KB by suppressing some knowledge and by forbidding to accept some new information in such a way that adding any allowed formula φ to the revised KB will not bring inconsistency.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alchourrón, Gärdenfors and Makinson. On the logic of theory change: partial meet contraction and revision functions. Symbolic Logic, vol 50, 510–530, 1985.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Benferhat, Cayrol, Dubois, Lang, Prade. Inconsistency management and prioritized syntax-based entailment. DCAI, vol 3, 640–645, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Benferhat and Smets. Belief functions for logical problems: representing default rules in e-beliefs logics. In Abstract of the Dagstuhl Seminar, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bezzazi H., Janot S., Konieczny S., Pino Perez R. Analysing Rational Properties of change operators based on forward chaining. In Transactions and Change in Logic Databases. LNCS Vol. 1472, pp 317–339.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Bouali, Loiseau. Rule Base Diagnosis for debugging. EUROVAV, 225–240, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bouali, Loiseau, Rousset. Revision of Rule Bases. EUROVAV, 193–204, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  7. G. Brewka. Preferred sub theories: an extended logical framework for default reasoning. IJCAI, 1043–1048, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Cayrol, Lagasquie-Schiex. Non-monotonic syntax-based entailment: a classification of consequence relations. Lecture notes in AI, 946, p. 107–114, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Dubois, Lang, Prade. Inconsistency in possibilistic knowledge bases-To live or not live with it. Fuzzy Logic for the Management of Uncertainty, Wiley, 335–351, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Dupin de Saint-Cyr, Lang and Schiex. Penalty logic and its link with Dempster-Shafer theory. In Proc. of the 10th Uncertainty in AI, p. 204–211, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Dupin de Saint-Cyr, Loiseau. Validation et révision. 12éme Congrés Francophone AFRIF-AFTA de RFTA, Paris 1-3 février 2000, vol I, pages 175–183. 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Gärdenfors P., Knowledge in Flux-Modeling the dynamic of epistemic states. The MIT Press, Cambridge, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Katsuno, Mendelzon. On the difference between updating a knowledge base and revising it. Principles of Knowledge Representation, p. 387–394, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  14. de Kleer, J. An assumption-based truth-maintenance system. Artificial Intelligence, vol. 28(2), p. 127–224 1986.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. de Kleer, J. Williams, B.C. Diagnosing Multiple Faults. AI(32), 97–130 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  16. D. Lehmann. 1992. Another perspective on default reasoning. Tec. Report.

    Google Scholar 

  17. B. Nebel. Belief revision and default reasoning: syntax-based approaches. In Proc. of the 2nd KR, p. 417–428. Cambridge, MA, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  18. G. Pinkas. Prepositional nonmonotonic reasoning and inconsistency in symmetric neural networks. In Prof, of the 12th DCAI. p. 525–530. Sydney, Australia, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Reiter, R. A theory of diagnosis from first principles. AI, vol 32, p. 57–95, 1987.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  20. N. Rescher. Hypothetical Reasoning. North-Holland, 1964.

    Google Scholar 

  21. M. Winslett. Reasoning about action using a possible models approach. AAAI, p. 89–93, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. LERIA Université, d’Angers 2 bd Lavoisier, 49045, ANGERS Cedex 01, France

    Florence Dupin de Saint-Cyr, Béatrice Duval & Stéphane Loiseau

Authors
  1. Florence Dupin de Saint-Cyr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Béatrice Duval
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Stéphane Loiseau
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Université Paul Sabatier, IRIT-CNRS, 118 route de Narbonne, 31062, Toulouse Cedex 4, France

    Salem Benferhat  & Philippe Besnard  & 

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2001 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

de Saint-Cyr, F.D., Duval, B., Loiseau, S. (2001). A Priori Revision. In: Benferhat, S., Besnard, P. (eds) Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty. ECSQARU 2001. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 2143. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44652-4_43

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44652-4_43

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-42464-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-44652-1

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation