Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

European Conference on Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning and Uncertainty

ECSQARU 2003: Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty pp 515–527Cite as

Preferential Logics for Reasoning with Graded Uncertainty

  • Conference paper

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 2711))

Abstract

We introduce a family of preferential logics that are useful for handling information with different levels of uncertainty. The corresponding consequence relations are non-monotonic, paraconsistent, adaptive, and rational. It is also shown that any formalism in this family that is based on a well-founded ordering of the different types of uncertainty, can be embedded in a corresponding four-valued logic with at most three uncertainty levels.

This is a preview of subscription content, 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   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
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. Arieli, O.: Reasoning with modularly pointwise preferential relations. In: van den Bosch, A., Weigand, H. (eds.) Proc. BNAIC 2000, pp. 61–68. BNVKI (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Arieli, O.: Useful adaptive logics for rational and paraconsistent reasoning. Technical Report CW286, Depatrment of Computer Science, University of Leuven (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Arieli, O.: Paraconsistent declarative semantics for extended logic programs. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 36(4), 381–417 (2002)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  4. Arieli, O., Avron, A.: Reasoning with logical bilattices. Journal of Logic, Language, and Information 5(1), 25–63 (1996)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  5. Arieli, O., Avron, A.: The logical role of the four-valued bilattice. In: Proc. LICS 1998, pp. 218–226. IEEE Press, Los Alamitos (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Arieli, O., Avron, A.: Nonmonotonic and paraconsistent reasoning: From basic entailments to plausible relations. In: Hunter, A., Parsons, S. (eds.) ECSQARU 1999. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1638, pp. 11–22. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Arieli, O., Denecker, M.: Modeling paraconsistent reasoning by classical logic. In: Eiter, T., Schewe, K.-D. (eds.) FoIKS 2002. LNCS, vol. 2284, pp. 1–14. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  8. Avron, A.: Simple consequence relations. Journal of Information and Computation 92, 105–139 (1991)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Avron, A.: Classical Gentzen-type methods in propositional many-valued logics. In: Fitting, M., Orlowska, E. (eds.) Theory and Applications in Multiple-Valued Logics, pp. 113–151. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Batens, D.: Inconsistency-adaptive logics. In: Orlowska, E. (ed.) Logic at Work, pp. 445–472. Physica Verlag, Heidelberg (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Batens, D.: On a partial decision method for dynamic proofs. In: Decker, H., Villadsen, J., Waragai, T. (eds.) Proc. PCL 2002, ICLP 2002 Workshop on Paraconsistent Computational Logic, pp. 91–108 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Batens, D., Mortensen, C., Priest, G., Van Bendegem, J.: Frontiers of Paraconsistent Logic. In: Studies in Logic and Computation Vol. 8. Research Studies Press, Hertfordshire (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Belnap, N.D.: A useful four-valued logic. In: Epstein, G., Dunn, J.M. (eds.) Modern Uses of Multiple-Valued Logic, pp. 7–37. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrechtz (1977)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Belnap, N.D.: How a computer should think. In: Ryle, G. (ed.) Contemporary Aspects of Philosophy, pp. 30–56. Oriel Press (1977)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Benferhat, S., Besnard, P. (eds.): ECSQARU 2001. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2143. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Bialynicki-Birula, A.: Remarks on quasi-boolean algebras. Bull. Acad. Polonaise des Sciences Cl. III V(6), 615–619 (1957)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  17. Bialynicki-Birula, A., Rasiowa, H.: On the representation of quasi-boolean algebras. Bull. Acad. Polonaise des Sciences Cl. III V(3), 259–261 (1957)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. Carnielli, W., Coniglio, M.E., D’Ottaviano, I.M.L.: Paraconsistency: The logical way to the inconsistent. Lecture Notes in Pure and Applied Mathematics, vol. 228. Marcel Dekker (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  19. da-Costa, N.C.A.: On the theory of inconsistent formal systems. Notre Dam Journal of Formal Logic 15, 497–510 (1974)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  20. Damasio, C.M., Pereira, L.M.: A survey on paraconsistent semantics for extended logic programs. In: Gabbay, D.M., Smets, P. (eds.) Handbook of Defeasible Reasoning and Uncertainty Management Systems, vol. 2, pp. 241–320. Kluwer, Dordrecht (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Dubois, D., Lang, J., Prade, H.: Possibilistic logic. In: Gabbay, D., Hogger, C., Robinson, J. (eds.) Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming, pp. 439–513. Oxford Science Publications (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Hajek, P.: Metamathematics of Fuzzy Logic. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (1998)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Hunter, A., Parsons, S. (eds.): ECSQARU 1999. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1638. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. Gabbay, D.M.: Theoretical foundation for non-monotonic reasoning in expert systems. In: Apt, K.P. (ed.) Proc. of the NATO Advanced Study Inst. on Logic and Models of Concurrent Systems, pp. 439–457. Springer, Heidelberg (1985)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Kalman, J.A.: Lattices with involution. Trans. of the American Mathematical Society 87, 485–491 (1958)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  26. Kifer, M., Lozinskii, E.L.: A logic for reasoning with inconsistency. Automated Reasoning 9(2), 179–215 (1992)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  27. Kraus, S., Lehmann, D., Magidor, M.: Nonmonotonic reasoning, preferential models and cumulative logics. Artificial Intelligence 44(1–2), 167–207 (1990)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  28. Lehmann, D., Magidor, M.: What does a conditional knowledge base entail? Artificial Intelligence 55, 1–60 (1992)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  29. Lukasiewicz, T.: Fixpoint characterizations for many-valued disjunctive logic programs with probabilistic semantics. In: Eiter, T., Faber, W., Truszczyński, M. (eds.) LPNMR 2001. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2173, pp. 336–350. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Makinson, D.: General theory of cumulative inference. In: Reinfrank, M., Ginsberg, M.L., de Kleer, J., Sandewall, E. (eds.) Non-Monotonic Reasoning 1988. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 346, pp. 1–18. Springer, Heidelberg (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Makinson, D.: General patterns in nonmonotonic reasoning. In: Gabbay, D., Hogger, C., Robinson, J. (eds.) Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming 3, pp. 35–110. Oxford Science Publications (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  32. McCarthy, J.: Circumscription – A form of non monotonic reasoning. Artificial Intelligence 13(1–2), 27–39 (1980)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  33. Pearl, J.: Reasoning under uncertainty. Annual Review of Computer Science 4, 37–72 (1989)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  34. Priest, G.: Minimally inconsistent LP. Studia Logica 50, 321–331 (1991)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  35. Schlechta, K.: Unrestricted preferential structures. Journal of Logic and Computation 10(4), 573–581 (2000)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  36. Shoham, Y.: Reasoning about change. MIT Press, Cambridge (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Subrahmanian, V.S.: Mechanical proof procedures for many-valued lattice-based logic programming. Journal of Non-Classical Logic 7, 7–41 (1990)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  38. Tarski, A.: Introduction to logic. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1941)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science, The Academic College of Tel-Aviv, 4 Antokolski Street, Tel-Aviv 61161, Israel

    Ofer Arieli

Authors
  1. Ofer Arieli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science, Aalborg University, Fredrik Bajersvej 7E, 9220, Aalborg, Denmark

    Thomas Dyhre Nielsen

  2. Department of Computer Science, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, ClearWater Bay Road, Kowloon, Hong Kong, China,

    Nevin Lianwen Zhang

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2003 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Arieli, O. (2003). Preferential Logics for Reasoning with Graded Uncertainty. In: Nielsen, T.D., Zhang, N.L. (eds) Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty. ECSQARU 2003. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 2711. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-45062-7_42

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-45062-7_42

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-40494-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-45062-7

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation