Skip to main content

Comparing Inconsistency Resolutions in Multi-Context Systems

  • Conference paper

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNTCS,volume 7415))

Abstract

Inconsistency in heterogeneous knowledge-integration systems with non-monotonic information exchange is a major concern as it renders systems useless at its occurrence. For the knowledge-integration framework of Multi-Context Systems, the problem of finding all possible resolutions to inconsistency has been addressed previously and some basic steps have been proposed to find most preferred resolutions. Here, we refine the techniques of finding preferred resolutions of inconsistency in two directions. First, we extend available qualitative methods using domain knowledge on the intention and category of information exchange to minimize the number of categories that are affected by a resolution. Second, we present a quantitative inconsistency measure for inconsistency resolutions, being suitable for scenarios where no further domain knowledge is available.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

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   49.99
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

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bikakis, A., Antoniou, G., Hassapis, P.: Strategies for contextual reasoning with conflicts in ambient intelligence. Knowl. Inf. Syst. 27(1), 45–84 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Brewka, G., Eiter, T.: Equilibria in heterogeneous nonmonotonic multi-context systems. In: AAAI, pp. 385–390. AAAI Press (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Brewka, G., Eiter, T., Fink, M., Weinzierl, A.: Managed multi-context systems. In: Walsh, T. (ed.) IJCAI, pp. 786–791. IJCAI/AAAI (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G., Lembo, D., Lenzerini, M., Rosati, R.: Inconsistency Tolerance in P2P Data Integration: An Epistemic Logic Approach. In: Bierman, G., Koch, C. (eds.) DBPL 2005. LNCS, vol. 3774, pp. 90–105. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Damásio, C.V., Pereira, L.M.: A survey of paraconsistent semantics for logic programs. In: Handbook of Defeasible Reasoning and Uncertainty Management Systems, pp. 241–320. Kluwer Academic Publishers (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Eiter, T., Fink, M., Schüller, P., Weinzierl, A.: Finding explanations of inconsistency in multi-context systems. In: Lin, F., Sattler, U., Truszczynski, M. (eds.) KR. AAAI Press (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Eiter, T., Fink, M., Weinzierl, A.: Preference-Based Inconsistency Assessment in Multi-Context Systems. In: Janhunen, T., Niemelä, I. (eds.) JELIA 2010. LNCS, vol. 6341, pp. 143–155. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  8. Eiter, T., Ianni, G., Krennwallner, T.: Answer Set Programming: A Primer. In: Tessaris, S., Franconi, E., Eiter, T., Gutierrez, C., Handschuh, S., Rousset, M.-C., Schmidt, R.A. (eds.) Reasoning Web. LNCS, vol. 5689, pp. 40–110. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Faber, W., Pfeifer, G., Leone, N.: Semantics and complexity of recursive aggregates in answer set programming. Artif. Intell. 175(1), 278–298 (2011)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Fink, M., Ghionna, L., Weinzierl, A.: Relational Information Exchange and Aggregation in Multi-Context Systems. In: Delgrande, J.P., Faber, W. (eds.) LPNMR 2011. LNCS, vol. 6645, pp. 120–133. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Giunchiglia, F., Serafini, L.: Multilanguage hierarchical logics or: How we can do without modal logics. Artif. Intell. 65(1), 29–70 (1994)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Hunter, A., Konieczny, S.: Measuring inconsistency through minimal inconsistent sets. In: Brewka, G., Lang, J. (eds.) KR, pp. 358–366. AAAI Press (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Meilicke, C., Stuckenschmidt, H., Tamilin, A.: Repairing ontology mappings. In: AAAI, pp. 1408–1413. AAAI Press (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Przymusinski, T.: Stable semantics for disjunctive programs. New Generation Computing 9(3), 401–424 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Weinzierl, A. (2012). Comparing Inconsistency Resolutions in Multi-Context Systems. In: Lassiter, D., Slavkovik, M. (eds) New Directions in Logic, Language and Computation. ESSLLI ESSLLI 2010 2011. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 7415. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31467-4_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31467-4_11

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-31466-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-31467-4

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics