Abstract
The starting point of this work is the gap between two distinct traditions in information engineering: knowledge representation and data-driven modelling. The first tradition emphasizes logic as a tool for representing beliefs held by an agent. The second tradition claims that the main source of knowledge is made of observed data, and generally does not use logic as a modelling tool. However, the emergence of fuzzy logic has blurred the boundaries between these two traditions by putting forward fuzzy rules as a Janus-faced tool that may represent knowledge, as well as approximate non-linear functions representing data. This paper lays bare logical foundations of data-driven reasoning whereby a set of formulas is understood as a set of observed facts rather than a set of beliefs. Several representation frameworks are considered from this point of view: classical logic, possibility theory, belief functions, epistemic logic, fuzzy rule-based systems. Mamdani's fuzzy rules are recovered as belonging to the data-driven view. In possibility theory a third set-function, different from possibility and necessity plays a key role in the data-driven view, and corresponds to a particular modality in epistemic logic. A bi-modal logic system is presented which handles both beliefs and observations, and for which a completeness theorem is given. Lastly, our results may shed new light in deontic logic and allow for a distinction between explicit and implicit permission that standard deontic modal logics do not often emphasize.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alchourron, C., 1993, “Philosophical foundations of deontic logic and the logic of defeasible conditionals,” pp. 43-84 in Deontic Logic in Computer Science: Normative System Specification, J.J.C. Meyer and R.J. Wieringa, eds., New York: John Wiley.
Anderson, A.R., 1958, “A reduction of deontic logic to alethic modal logic,” Mind 67, 100-103.
Boutilier, C., 1992, “Conditional logics for default reasoning and belief revision,” Technical Report KRR-TR-92-1, Knowledge Representation and Reasoning series, University of Toronto, Canada.
Chellas, B.F., 1980, Modal Logic: An Introduction, Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
Dignum, F., Meyer, J.-J.Ch., and Wieringa, R., 1996, “Free choice and contextually permitted actions,” Studia Logica 57, 1993-2020.
Dubois, D. and Prade, H., 1988, Possibility Theory-An Approach to Computerized Processing of Uncertainty, New York: Plenum Press.
Dubois, D. and Prade, H., 1991a, “Certainty and uncertainty of (vague), knowledge and generalized dependencies in fuzzy data bases,” pp. 239-249 in Proceedings of the 1st International Fuzzy Engineering Symposium (IFES'91), Yokohama, Japan, November 13-15, Singapore: World Scientific.
Dubois, D. and Prade, H., 1991b, “Epistemic entrenchment and possibilistic logic,” Artificial Intelligence 50, 223-239.
Dubois, D. and Prade, H., 1992, “Possibility theory as a basis for preference propagation in automated reasoning,” pp. 821-832 in Proceedings of the 1st IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems 1992, (FUZZ-IEEE'92), San Diego, CA, March 8-12, Piscataway, NJ: IEEE Press.
Dubois, D. and Prade, H., 1996, “What are fuzzy rules and how to use them,” Fuzzy Sets and Systems 84, 169-185.
Dubois, D., Lang, J., and Prade, H., 1994, “Possibilistic logic,” pp. 439-513 in Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming, Vol. 3, D.M. Gabbay, C.J. Hogger, J.A. Robinson, and D. Nute, eds., Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gärdenfors, P., 1988, Knowledge in Flux-Modeling the Dynamics of Epistemic States, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Goranko, R., 1990, “Completeness and incompleteness in the bimodal base calL(R,-R),” pp. 311-326 in Mathematical Logic, I. Petkov, ed., New York: PlenumPress.
Humberstone, I.L., 1983, “Inaccessible worlds,” Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logics 24(3), 346-352.
Kamp, H., 1973, “Free choice permission,” Proceedings Aristotelian Society N.S. 74, 57-74.
Levesque, H.J., 1990, “All I know: A study in autoepistemic logic,” Artificial Intelligence 42, 263-309.
Liau, C.J., 1997, “A semantics for logics of preference based on possibility theory,” pp. 243-248 in Proceedings of the 7th International Fuzzy Systems Association, IFSA'97) Congress, Prague, June 25-29, 1997, Prague: Academia.
Mamdani, E.H., 1977, “Application of fuzzy logic to approximate reasoning using linguistic systems,” IEEE Trans. Comput. 26, 1182-1191.
Meyer, J.J.C., 1988, “A different approach to deontic logic: Deontic logic viewed as a variant of dynamic logic,” Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 29(1), 109-136.
Meyer, J.J.C. and Wieringa, R.J., 1993, “Deontic logic: A concise overview,” pp. 3-16 in Deontic Logic in Computer Science: Normative System Specification, J.J.C. Meyer and R.J. Wieringa, eds., New York: John Wiley.
Nebel, B., 1989, “A knowledge level analysis of belief revision,” pp. 301-311 in Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR'91), Toronto, Ontario, Canada, May 18-18, R.J. Brachman, H.J. Levesque, and R. Reiter, eds., San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.
Prade, H. and Yager, R.R., 1994, “Estimations of expectedness and potential surprise in possibility theory,” International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems 2(4), 417-428.
Sanchez, E., 1978, “On possibility-qualification in natural languages,” Information Sciences 15, 45-76.
Shafer, G., 1976, A Mathematical Theory of Evidence, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Smets, P., 1988, “Belief functions,” pp. 253-286 in Non-Standard Logics for Approximate Reasoning, P. Smets, A. Mamdani, D. Dubois, and H. Prade, eds., New York: Academic Press.
Smets, P. and Kennes, R., 1994, “The transferable belief model,” Artificial Intelligence 66, 191-234.
van der Torre, L., 1997, “Defeasibility in preference-based deontic logic,” Ph.D. Thesis, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
von Wright, G.H., 1951, “Deontic logic,” Mind 60, 1-15.
Voorbraak, F., 1993, “As far as I know-Epistemic logic and uncertainty,” Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Philosophy, Utrecht University, The Netherlands.
Weisbrod, J., 1995, “Fuzzy control revisited-Why is it working?,” pp. 219-243 in Advances in Fuzzy Theory and Technology-Vol. III, P.P.Wang, ed., Durham, NC: Duke University.
Zadeh, L.A., 1978, “PRUF-A meaning representation language for natural languages,” International Journal of Man-Machine Studies 10, 395-460.
Zadeh, L.A., 1979, “A theory of approximate reasoning,” pp. 149-194 in Machine Intelligence, Vol. 9, J.E. Hayes, D. Michie, and L.I. Mikulich, eds., New York: Elsevier.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dubois, D., Hájek, P. & Prade, H. Knowledge-Driven versus Data-Driven Logics. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 9, 65–89 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008370109997
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008370109997