Belief Merging Using Normal Forms

  • Pilar Pozos-Parra
  • Laurent Perrussel
  • Jean Marc Thevenin
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7094)


Belief merging aims to conciliate multiple possibly inconsistent belief bases into a consistent common belief base. To handle inconsistency some operators have been proposed. Most of them do not consider inconsistent bases. PS-Merge is an alternative method of merging that uses the notion of Partial Satisfiability and allows us to take into account inconsistent bases. PS-Merge needs the bases represented as DNF formulas, nevertheless, many practical problems are easily represented in its CNF. The aim of this paper is to extend the notion of Partial Satisfiability in order to consider bases represented as CNF formulas. Moreover, we consider Prime Normal forms in order to define a method that allows us to implement PS-Merge for difficult theories. We also show that once the belief bases are represented as sets of normal forms, PS-Merge is polynomial.


Normal Form Conjunctive Normal Form Belief Base Disjunctive Normal Form Propositional Formula 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Borja Macías, V., Pozos Parra, P.: Model-based belief merging without distance measures. In: Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, Hawai’i, USA, pp. 613–615. IFAAMAS (2007)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Macías, V.B., Parra, P.P.: Implementing PS-merge Operator. In: Aguirre, A.H., Borja, R.M., Garciá, C.A.R. (eds.) MICAI 2009. LNCS, vol. 5845, pp. 39–50. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Everaere, P., Konieczny, S., Marquis, P.: The strategy-proofness landscape of merging. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 28, 49–105 (2007)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gorogiannis, N., Hunter, A.: Implementing semantic merging operators using binary decision diagrams. Int. J. Approx. Reasoning 49(1), 234–251 (2008)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hue, J., Papini, O., Wurbel, E.: Syntactic propositional belief bases fusion with removed sets. In: Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning and Uncertainty, pp. 66–77 (2007)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Konieczny, S., Pino-Pérez, R.: On the logic of merging. In: Cohn, A.G., Schubert, L., Shapiro, S.C. (eds.) KR 1998: Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, pp. 488–498. Morgan Kaufmann (1998)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Konieczny, S., Pino Pérez, R.: Merging with Integrity Constraints. In: Hunter, A., Parsons, S. (eds.) ECSQARU 1999. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1638, pp. 233–244. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Konieczny, S., Pino-Pérez, R.: Merging information under constraints: a logical framework. Journal of Logic and Computation 12(5), 773–808 (2002)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Liberatore, P., Schaerf, M.: Arbitration (or how to merge knowledge bases). IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 10(1), 76–90 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lin, J., Mendelzon, A.: Knowledge base merging by majority. In: Pareschi, R., Fronhoefer, B. (eds.) Dynamic Worlds: From the Frame Problem to Knowledge Management. Kluwer Academic (1999)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Marchi, J., Perrussel, L.: Prime normal forms in belief merging. In: FLAIRS Conference (2011)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Pozos Parra, P., Borja Macías, V.: Partial satisfiability-based merging. In: Gelbukh, A., Kuri Morales, Á.F. (eds.) MICAI 2007. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4827, pp. 225–235. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    van Dalen, D.: Logic and Structure, 2nd edn. Springer, Heidelberg (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pilar Pozos-Parra
    • 1
  • Laurent Perrussel
    • 2
  • Jean Marc Thevenin
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Informatics and SystemsUniversity of TabascoTabascoMexico
  2. 2.Institut de Recherche en Informatique de ToulouseUniversité Toulouse IToulouseFrance

Personalised recommendations