Abstract
We introduce a general method for paraconsistent reasoning in knowledge systems by classical second-order formulae. A standard technique for paraconsistent reasoning on inconsistent classical theories is by shifting to multiple-valued logics. We show how these multiple-valued theories can be “shifted back” to two-valued classical theories (through a polynomial transformation), and how preferential reasoning based on multiple-valued logic can be represented by classical circumscription-like axioms. By applying this process we manage to overcome the shortcoming of classical logic in properly handling inconsistent data, and provide new ways of implementing multiple-valued paraconsistent reasoning in knowledge systems. Standard multiple-valued reasoning can thus be performed through theorem provers for classical logic, and multiple-valued preferential reasoning can be implemented using algorithms for processing circumscriptive theories (such as DLS and SCAN).
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
O. Arieli, A. Avron. The logical role of the four-valued bilattice. Proc. LICS’98, pp.218–226, IEEE Press, 1998.
O. Arieli, A. Avron. The value of the four values. Artificial Intelligence 102(1), pp.97–141, 1998.
O. Arieli, A. Avron. Bilattices and paraconsistency. Frontiers of Paraconsistent Logic (D. Batens, C. Mortensen, G. Priest, J. Van Bendegem, editors), pp.11–27, Studies in Logic and Computation 8, Research Studies Press, 2000.
O. Arieli, M. Denecker. Circumscriptive approaches to paraconsistent reasoning. Technical Report CW-304, Department of Computer Science, University of Leuven, 2001.
N.D. Belnap. A useful four-valued logic. Modern Uses of Multiple-Valued Logic (G. Epstein, J.M. Dunn, editors), pp.7–37, Reidel Publishing Company, 1977.
N.D. Belnap. How computer should think. Contemporary Aspects of Philosophy (G. Ryle, editor), pp.30–56, Oriel Press, 1977.
N.C.A. da-Costa. On the theory of inconsistent formal systems. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 15, pp.497–510, 1974.
P. Doherty, W. Lukaszewicz, A. Szalas. Computing circumscription revisited: Preliminary report. Proc. IJCAI’95, pp.1502–1508, 1995.
P. Doherty, W. Lukaszewicz, A. Szalas. Computing circumscription revisited: A reduction algorithm. Journal of Automated Reasoning 18, pp.297–334, 1997.
M.L. Ginsberg. A circumscriptive theorem prover. Artificial Intelligence 29, pp.209–230, 1989.
M. ifer, E.L. Lozinskii. RI: A logic for reasoning with inconsistency. Proc. LICS’89, pp.253–262, IEEE Press, 1989.
M. Kifer, E.L. Lozinskii. A logic for reasoning with inconsistency. Journal of Automated Reasoning 9(2), pp.179–215, 1992.
S. Kraus, D. Lehmann, M. Magidor. Nonmonotonic reasoning, preferential models and cumulative logics. Artificial Intelligence 44(1–2) pp.167–207, 1990.
D. Lehmann, M. Magidor. What does a conditional knowledge base entail? Artificial Intelligence 55, pp.1–60, 1992.
D. Makinson. General theory of cumulative inference. Non-Monotonic Reasoning (M. Reinfrank, editor), LNAI 346, pp.1–18, Springer, 1989.
D. Makinson. General patterns in nonmonotonic reasoning. Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming 3 (D. Gabbay, C. Hogger, J. Robinson, editors) pp.35–110, Oxford Science Pub., 1994.
J. McCarthy. Circumscription-A form of non monotonic reasoning. Artificial Intelligence 13(1–2), pp.27–39, 1980.
J. McCarthy. Applications of circumscription to formalizing common-Sense knowledge. Artifical Intelligence 28, pp.89–116, 1986.
H.J. Ohlbach, SCAN-Elimination of predicate quantifiers. Proc. CADE’96, (M.A. McRobbie, J. Slaney, editors), LNAI 1104, pp.161–165, Springer, 1996.
G. Priest. Reasoning about truth. Artificial Intelligence 39, pp.231–244, 1989.
G. Priest. Minimally Inconsistent LP. Studia Logica 50, pp.321–331, 1991.
T. Przymusinski. An algorithm to compute circumscription. Artificial Intelligence 38, pp.49–73, 1991.
Y. Shoham. Reasoning about change. MIT Press, 1988.
A. Tarski. Introduction to logic. Oxford University Press, N.Y., 1941.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2002 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Arieli, O., Denecker, M. (2002). Modeling Paraconsistent Reasoning by Classical Logic. In: Eiter, T., Schewe, KD. (eds) Foundations of Information and Knowledge Systems. FoIKS 2002. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 2284. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45758-5_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45758-5_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-43220-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-45758-9
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive