Skip to Main content Skip to Navigation
Journal articles

Some syntactic approaches to the handling of inconsistent knowledge bases : A comparative study, Part 1 / The flat case

Abstract : This paper presents and discusses several methods for reasoning from inconsistent knowledge bases. A so-called argued consequence relation, taking into account the existence of consistent arguments in favour of a conclusion and the absence of consistent arguments in favour of its contrary, is particularly investigated. Flat knowledge bases, i.e., without any priority between their elements, are studied under different inconsistency-tolerant consequence relations, namely the so-called argumentative, free, universal, existential, cardinality-based, and paraconsistent consequence relations. The syntax-sensitivity of these consequence relations is studied. A companion paper is devoted to the case where priorities exist between the pieces of information in the knowledge base.
Document type :
Journal articles
Complete list of metadata

https://hal-univ-artois.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03299693
Contributor : Fabien Delorme <>
Submitted on : Monday, July 26, 2021 - 4:15:43 PM
Last modification on : Friday, September 10, 2021 - 2:15:16 PM

Links full text

Identifiers

Citation

Salem Benferhat, Didier Dubois, Henri Prade. Some syntactic approaches to the handling of inconsistent knowledge bases : A comparative study, Part 1 / The flat case. Studia Logica, Springer Verlag (Germany), 1997, 58, pp.17-45. ⟨10.1023/A:1004987830832⟩. ⟨hal-03299693⟩

Share

Metrics

Record views

16