Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Introducing Preference-Based Argumentation to Inconsistent Ontological Knowledge Bases

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
PRIMA 2015: Principles and Practice of Multi-Agent Systems (PRIMA 2015)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 9387))

Abstract

Handling inconsistency is an inherent part of decision making in traditional agri-food chains – due to the various concerns involved. In order to explain the source of inconsistency and represent the existing conflicts in the ontological knowledge base, argumentation theory can be used. However, the current state of art methodology does not allow to take into account the level of significance of the knowledge expressed by the various ontological knowledge sources. We propose to use preferences in order to model those differences between formulas and evaluate our proposal practically by implementing it within the INRA platform and showing a use case using this formalism in a bread making decision support system.

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 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
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. Amgoud, L., Vesic, S.: Rich preference-based argumentation frameworks. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning 55, 585–606 (2014)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Arioua, A., Tamani, N., Croitoru, M.: On conceptual graphs and explanation of query answering under inconsistency. In: Hernandez, N., Jäschke, R., Croitoru, M. (eds.) ICCS 2014. LNCS, vol. 8577, pp. 51–64. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Arioua, A., Tamani, N., Croitoru, M., Buche, P.: Query failure explanation in inconsistent knowledge bases using argumentation. In: Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Computational Models of Argument (COMMA 2014), pp. 101–108 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Baader, F., Brandt, S., Lutz, C.: Pushing the EL envelope. In: Proceedings of the 19th International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI 2005), pp. 364–369 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Benferhat, S., Dubois, D., Prade, H.: Argumentative inference in uncertain and inconsistent knowledge bases. In: Proceedings of the 9th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial intelligence (UAI 1993), pp. 411–419 (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Benferhat, S., Dubois, D., Prade, H.: Some syntactic approaches to the handling of inconsistent knowledge bases: a comparative study part 2: the prioritized case. In: Logic at Work: Essays Dedicated to the Memory of Helen Rasiowa, vol. 24, pp. 437–511. Physica-Verlag (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bienvenu, M.: On the complexity of consistent query answering in the presence of simple ontologies. In: Proceedings of the 26th Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI 2012), pp. 705–711 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Bienvenu, M., Bourgaux, C., Goasdoué, F.: Querying inconsistent description logic knowledge bases under preferred repair semantics. In: Proceedings of the 28th Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI 2014), pp. 996–1002 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Binas, A., McIlraith, S.A.: Peer-to-peer query answering with inconsistent knowledge. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR 2008), pp. 329–339 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Black, E., Hunter, A., Pan, J.Z.: An argument-based approach to using multiple ontologies. In: Godo, L., Pugliese, A. (eds.) SUM 2009. LNCS, vol. 5785, pp. 68–79. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Brewka, G.: Preferred subtheories: an extended logical framework for default reasoning. In:1 Proceedings of the 11th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI 1989), pp. 1043–1048 (1989)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G., Lembo, D., Lenzerini, M., Rosati, R.: Tractable reasoning and efficient query answering in description logics: the DL-lite family. Journal of Automated Reasoning 39(3), 385–429 (2007)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Caminada, M., Amgoud, L.: On the evaluation of argumentation formalisms. Artificial Intelligence Journal 171(5–6), 286–310 (2007)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Croitoru, M., Thomopoulos, R., Vesic, S.: Introducing preference-based argumentation to inconsistent ontological knowledge bases. CNRS - University of Artois, Technical report, CRIL (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Croitoru, M., Vesic, S.: What can argumentation do for inconsistent ontology query answering? In: Liu, W., Subrahmanian, V.S., Wijsen, J. (eds.) SUM 2013. LNCS, vol. 8078, pp. 15–29. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  16. Dung, P.M.: On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Artificial Intelligence Journal 77, 321–357 (1995)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Kaci, S.: Refined preference-based argumentation frameworks. In: Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Computational Models of Argument (COMMA 2010), pp. 299–310 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Lembo, D., Lenzerini, M., Rosati, R., Ruzzi, M., Savo, D.F.: Inconsistency-tolerant semantics for description logics. In: Hitzler, P., Lukasiewicz, T. (eds.) RR 2010. LNCS, vol. 6333, pp. 103–117. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  19. Lenzerini, M.: Data integration: a theoretical perspective. In: Proceedings of the 21st Symposium on Principles of Database Systems (PODS 2002), pp. 233–246 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Lukasiewicz, T., Martinez, M.V., Simari, G.I.: Inconsistency handling in Datalog+/- ontologies. In: Proceedings of the 20th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI 2012), pp. 558–563 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Lukasiewicz, T., Martinez, M.V., Simari, G.I.: Complexity of inconsistency-tolerant query answering in Datalog+/-. In: Informal Proceedings of the 26th International Workshop on Description Logics, pp. 791–803 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Modgil, S., Prakken, H.: A general account of argumentation and preferences. Artificial Intelligence Journal 195, 361–397 (2013)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Staworko, S., Chomicki, J., Marcinkowski, J.: Preference-driven querying of inconsistent relational databases. In: Grust, T., Höpfner, H., Illarramendi, A., Jablonski, S., Fischer, F., Müller, S., Patranjan, P.-L., Sattler, K.-U., Spiliopoulou, M., Wijsen, J. (eds.) EDBT 2006. LNCS, vol. 4254, pp. 318–335. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  24. Tamani, N., Croitoru, M., Buche, P.: Conflicting viewpoint relational database querying: An argumentation approach. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-agent Systems (AAMAS 2014), pp. 1553–1554 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Thomopoulos, R., Croitoru, M., Tamani, N.: Decision support for agri-food chains: a reverse engineering argumentation-based approach. Ecological Informatics (2014)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. INRIA, LIRMM, University Montpellier 2, Montpellier, France

    Madalina Croitoru

  2. INRA GraphIK, Montpellier, France

    Rallou Thomopoulos

  3. CRIL, CNRS - University of Artois, Lens, France

    Srdjan Vesic

Authors
  1. Madalina Croitoru
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rallou Thomopoulos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Srdjan Vesic
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Srdjan Vesic .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Jinan University, Guangzhou, China

    Qingliang Chen

  2. Università di Bologna, Bologna, Italy

    Paolo Torroni

  3. Inria - Sophia Antipolis-Méditerran, Sophia Antipolis, France

    Serena Villata

  4. National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan

    Jane Hsu

  5. Università di Bologna, Bologna, Italy

    Andrea Omicini

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Croitoru, M., Thomopoulos, R., Vesic, S. (2015). Introducing Preference-Based Argumentation to Inconsistent Ontological Knowledge Bases. In: Chen, Q., Torroni, P., Villata, S., Hsu, J., Omicini, A. (eds) PRIMA 2015: Principles and Practice of Multi-Agent Systems. PRIMA 2015. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 9387. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-25524-8_42

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-25524-8_42

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-25523-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-25524-8

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation