Abstract
One of the most significant drawbacks of classical logic is its being useless in the presence of an inconsistency. Nevertheless, the classical calculus is a very convenient framework to work with. In this work we propose means for drawing conclusions from systems that are based on classical logic, although the information might be inconsistent. The idea is to detect those parts of the knowledge base that ‘cause’ the inconsistency, and isolate the parts that are ‘recoverable’. We do this by temporarily switching into Ginsberg/Fitting multivalued framework of bilattices (which is a common framework for logic programming and nonmonotonic reasoning). Our method is conservative in the sense that it considers the contradictory data as useless and regards all the remaining information unaffected. The resulting logic is nonmonotonic, paraconsistent, and a plausibility logic in the sense of Lehmann.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Anderson, A. R. and Belnap, N. D.: Entailment, Vol. 1, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1975.
Arieli, O. and Avron, A.: Logical bilattices and inconsistent data, in Proc. 9th IEEE Annual Symp. on Logic in Computer Science (LICS'94), IEEE Press, 1994, pp. 468–476.
Arieli, O. and Avron, A.: A bilattice-based approach to recover consistent data from inconsistent knowledge bases, in Proc. of the 4th Bar-Ilan Symp. on Foundations of Artificial Intelligence (BISFAI'95), AAAI Press, 1995, pp. 14–23.
Arieli, O. and Avron, A.: Reasoning with logical bilattices, J. Logic, Language, and Inform. 5(1) (1996), 25–63.
Arieli, O. and Avron, A.: Four-valued diagnoses for stratified knowledge bases, in D. Van-dalen and M. Benzem (eds.), Proc. of the 1996 Ann. Conf. of the European Association for Computer Science Logic (CSL'96), Lecture Notes in Computer Science 1258, Springer-Verlag, 1997, pp. 1–17.
Avron, A.: On an implication connective of RM, Notre Dame J. Formal Logic 27 (1986), 201–209.
Benferhat, S., Cayrol, C., Dubois, D., Lang, J., and Prade, H.: Inconsistency management and prioritized syntax-based entailment, in Proc. 13th Int. Joint Conf. on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI'93), 1993, pp. 640–645.
Benferhat, S., Dubois, D., and Prade, H.: How to infer from inconsistent beliefs without revising?, in Proc. 14th Int. Joint Conf. on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI'95), 1995, pp. 1449–1455.
Belnap, N. D.: A useful four-valued logic, in G. Epstein and J. M. Dunn (eds.), Modern Uses of Multiple-Valued Logic, Reidel, Dordrecht, 1977, pp. 7–37.
Belnap, N. D.: How computers should think, in G. Ryle (ed.), Contemporary Aspects of Philosophy, Oriel Press, Stocksfield, England, 1977, pp. 30–56.
Brown, A. L., Jr. and Shoham, Y.: New results on semantical nonmonotonic reasoning, in Proc. 2nd Int. Workshop on Non-Monotonic Reasoning, Springer-Verlag, 1988, pp. 19–26.
da-Costa, N. C. A., Subrahmanian, V. S., Henschen, L. J., and Lu, J. J.: Automatic theorem proving in paraconsistent logics: Theory and implementation, in M. E. Stickel (ed.), 10th Int. Conf. on Automated Deduction, 1990, pp. 72–86.
da-Costa, N. C. A.: On the theory of inconsistent formal systems, Notre Dame J. Formal Logic 15 (1974), 497–510.
Epstein, R. L.: The Semantic Foundation of Logic, Vol. I: Propositional Logics, Kluwer Acad. Publ., 1990.
Fitting, M.: Negation as refutation, in Proc. 4th Annual Symp. on Logic in Computer Science (LICS'89), IEEE Press, 1989, pp. 63–70.
Fitting, M.: Kleene's logic, generalized, J. Logic Comput. 1 (1990), 797–810.
Fitting, M.: Bilattices in logic programming, in G. Epstein (ed.), Proc 20th Int. Symp. on Multiple-Valued Logic IEEE Press, 1990, pp. 238–246.
Fitting, M.: Bilattices and the semantics of logic programming, J. Logic Programming 11(2) (1991), 91–116.
Fitting, M.: The family of stable models, J. Logic Programming 17 (1993), 197–225.
Fitting, M.: Kleene's three-valued logics and their children, Fund. Inform. 20 (1994), 113–131.
Genesereth, M. R.: The use of design description in authomated diagnosis, J. Artificial Intelligence 24 (1984), 411–436.
Ginsberg, M. L.: Multivalued logics: A uniform approach to reasoning in AI, Comput. Intelligence 4 (1988), 256–316.
Kifer, M. and Lozinskii, E. L.: A logic for reasoning with Inconsistency, J. Automated Reasoning 9(2) (1992), 179–215.
Kifer, M. and Subrahmanian, V. S.: Theory of generalized annotated programming and it's applications, J. Logic Programming 12 (1992), 335–367.
Lehmann, D.: Plausibility logic, in Proc. of 5th Ann. Conf. of the European Association for Computer Science Logic (CSL'91), Springer-Verlag, 1992, pp. 227–241.
Levesque, H. J.: Making believers out of computers, J. Artificial Intelligence 30 (1986), 81–108.
Lifschitz, V.: Benchmark problems for formal nonmonotonic reasoning, in Proc. 2nd Int. Workshop on Non-Monotonic Reasoning, Springler-Verlag, 1988, pp. 202–219.
Lozinskii, E. L.: Recovering contradictions: A plausible semantics for inconsistent systems, J. Automated Reasoning 12 (1994), 1–31.
d'Ottaviano, I. M. L. and da-Costa, N. C. A.: Sur un probleme de Jaskowski, C.R. Hebdomadaires des Seances de I'Academie des Sciences, Serie A 270 (1970), 1349–1353.
d'Ottaviano, I. M. L.: The completeness and compactness of a three-valued first order logic, Rev. Colombiana Mat. 19(1–2) (1985), 31–42.
Pool, D.: A logical framework for default reasoning, J. Artificial Intelligence 36 (1988), 27–47.
Priest, G.: Reasoning about truth, J. Artificial Intelligence 39 (1989), 231–244.
Priest, G.: Minimally inconsistent LP, Studia Logica 50 (1991), 321–331.
Raiman, O.: The alibi principle, in W. Hamscher, L. Console, and J. de-Kleer (eds.), Readings in Model-Based Diagnosis, Morgan Kaufmann, 1992, pp. 66–70.
Reiter, R.: A theory of diagnosis from first principles, J. Artificial Intelligence 32(1) (1987), 57–95.
Rescher, R. and Manor, R.: On inference from inconsistent premises, J. Theory and Decision 1 (1970), 179–219.
Rozoner, L. I.: On interpretation of inconsistent theories, Inform. Sci. 47 (1989), 243–266.
Subrahmanian, V. S.: Mechanical proof procedures for many valued lattice-based logic programming, J. Non-Classical Logic 7 (1990), 7–41.
Subrahmanian, V. S.: Paraconsistent disjunctive deductive databases, in Proc. 20th Int. Symp. on Multiple-Valued Logic, IEEE Press, 1990, pp. 339–345.
Subrahmanian, V. S.: Amalgamating knowledge bases, ACM Transactions on Database Systems 19(2) (1994), 291–331.
Wagner, G.: Vivid Logic: Knowledge Based Reasoning with Two Kinds of Negation, Lecture Notes in AI 764, Springer-Verlag, 1994.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Arieli, O., Avron, A. A Model-Theoretic Approach for Recovering Consistent Data from Inconsistent Knowledge Bases. Journal of Automated Reasoning 22, 263–309 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006020529663
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006020529663