Abstract
Measures of quantity of information have been studied extensively for more than fifty years. The seminal work on information theory is by Shannon [67]. This work, based on probability theory, can be used in a logical setting when the worlds are the possible events. This work is also the basis of Lozinskii’s work [48] for defining the quantity of information of a formula (or knowledgebase) in propositional logic. But this definition is not suitable when the knowledgebase is inconsistent. In this case, it has no classical model, so we have no “event” to count. This is a shortcoming since in practical applications (e.g. databases) it often happens that the knowledgebase is not consistent. And it is definitely not true that all inconsistent knowledgebases contain the same (null) amount of information, as given by the “classical information theory”. As explored for several years in the paraconsistent logic community, two inconsistent knowledgebases can lead to very different conclusions, showing that they do not convey the same information. There has been some recent interest in this issue, with some interesting proposals. Though a general approach for information theory in (possibly inconsistent) logical knowledgebases is missing. Another related measure is the measure of contradiction. It is usual in classical logic to use a binary measure of contradiction: a knowledgebase is either consistent or inconsistent. This dichotomy is obvious when the only deductive tool is classical inference, since inconsistent knowledgebases are of no use. But there are now a number of logics developed to draw non-trivial conclusions from an inconsistent knowledgebase. So this dichotomy is not sufficient to describe the amount of contradiction of a knowledgebase, one needs more fine-grained measures. Some interesting proposals have been made for this. The main aim of this paper is to review the measures of information and contradiction, and to study some potential practical applications. This has significant potential in developing intelligent systems that can be tolerant to inconsistencies when reasoning with real-world knowledge.
Access provided by Autonomous University of Puebla. Download to read the full chapter text
Chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
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.
References
Alchourrón, C., Gärdenfors, P., Makinson, D.: On the logic of theory change: partial meet contraction and revision functions. Journal of Symbolic Logic 50, 510–530 (1985)
Amgoud, L., Parsons, S., Maudet, N.: Arguments, dialogue, and negotiation. In: Proceedings of the 14th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, ECAI 2000 (2000)
Arrow, K.J.: Social choice and individual values, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York (1963)
Baral, C., Kraus, S., Minker, J., Subrahmanian, V.S.: Combining knowledge bases consisting of first-order theories. Computational Intelligence 8(1), 45–71 (1992)
Baral, C., Kraus, S., Minker, J.: Combining multiple knowledge bases. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 3(2), 208–220 (1991)
Belnap, N.: A useful four-valued logic. In: Epstein, G. (ed.) Modern Uses of Multiple-valued Logic, pp. 8–37. Reidel, Dordrecht (1977)
Benferhat, S., Dubois, D., Prade, H.: Argumentative inference in uncertain and inconsistent knowledge bases. In: Proceedings of Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 1445–1449. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1993)
Benferhat, S., Dubois, D., Prade, H.: An overview of inconsistency-tolerant inferences in prioritized knowledge bases. In: Fuzzy Sets, Logic and Reasoning about Knowledge. Applied Logic Series, vol. 15, pp. 395–417. Kluwer, Dordrecht (1999)
Besnard, P., Hunter, A.: Quasi-classical logic: Non-trivializable classical reasoning from inconsistent information. In: Froidevaux, C., Kohlas, J. (eds.) ECSQARU 1995. LNCS, vol. 946, pp. 44–51. Springer, Heidelberg (1995)
Besnard, P., Hunter, A.: Introduction to actual and potential contradictions. In: Besnard, P., Hunter, A. (eds.), Gabbay, D., Smets, P. (series eds.) Handbook of Defeasible Resoning and Uncertainty Management Systems, vol. 2, pp. 1–9. Kluwer, Dordrecht (1998)
Brewka, G.: Preferred subtheories: An extended logical framework for default reasoning. In: Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 1043–1048 (1989)
Cholvy, L., Garion, C.: Querying Several Conflicting Databases. Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics 14(3), 295–327 (2004)
Carnielli, W., Marcos, J.: A taxonomy of C systems. In: Paraconsistency: The Logical Way to the Inconsistent, pp. 1–94. Marcel Decker, New York (2002)
Chesnevar, C., Maguitman, A., Loui, R.: Logical models of argument. ACM Computing Surveys 32, 337–383 (2001)
Dalal, M.: Investigations into a theory of knowledge base revision: Preliminary report. In: Proceedings of the 7th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI 1988), pp. 3–7. MIT Press, Cambridge (1988)
Darwiche, A., Pearl, J.: On the logic of iterated belief revision. Artificial Intelligence 89, 1–29 (1997)
da Costa, N.C.: On the theory of inconsistent formal systems. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 15, 497–510 (1974)
Dubois, D., Konieczny, S., Prade, H.: Quasi-possibilistic logic and its measures of information and conflict. Fundamenta Informaticae 57, 101–125 (2003)
Dubois, D., Lang, J., Prade, H.: Possibilistic logic. In: Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming, vol. 3, pp. 439–513. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1994)
Dubois, D., Prade, H.: Properties of measures of information in evidence and possibility theories. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 24, 161–182 (1987); Reprinted in Fuzzy Sets and Systems, supplement 100, 35–49 (1999)
Elvang-Goransson, M., Hunter, A.: Argumentative logics: Reasoning from classically inconsistent information. Data and Knowledge Engineering 16, 125–145 (1995)
Friedman, N., Halpern, J.Y.: Belief revision: a critique. In: Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR 1996), pp. 421–431 (1996)
Gabbay, D., Hunter, A.: Making inconsistency respectable 1: A logical framework for inconsistency in reasoning. In: Jorrand, P., Kelemen, J. (eds.) FAIR 1991. LNCS, vol. 535, pp. 19–32. Springer, Heidelberg (1991)
Gärdenfors, P.: Knowledge in Flux. MIT Press, Cambridge (1988)
Grant, J., Hunter, A.: Measuring inconsistency in knowledgebases. Technical report, UCL Department of Computer Science (2004)
Grant, J.: Classifications for inconsistent theories. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 19, 435–444 (1978)
Hintikka, J.: On semantic information. Information and Inference, 3–27 (1970)
Hunter, A.: Paraconsistent logics. In: Gabbay, D., Smets, P. (eds.) Handbook of Defeasible Resoning and Uncertainty Management Systems, vol. 2, pp. 11–36. Kluwer, Dordrecht (1998)
Hunter, A.: Reasoning with contradictory information using quasi-classical logic. Journal of Logic and Computation 10, 677–703 (2000)
Hunter, A.: A semantic tableau version of first-order quasi-classical logic. In: Benferhat, S., Besnard, P. (eds.) ECSQARU 2001. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2143, pp. 544–556. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)
Hunter, A.: Measuring inconsistency in knowledge via quasi-classical models. In: Proceedings of the 18th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI 2002), pp. 68–73. MIT Press, Cambridge (2002)
Hunter, A.: Evaluating the significance of inconsistency. In: Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on AI (IJCAI 2003), pp. 468–473 (2003)
Hunter, A.: Measuring inconsistency in first-order knowledge. Technical report, UCL Department of Computer Science (2003)
Hunter, A.: Logical comparison of inconsistent perspectives using scoring functions. Knowledge and Information Systems Journal (2004) (in press)
Kemeny, J.: A logical measure function. Journal of Symbolic Logic 18, 289–308 (1953)
De Kleer, J., Williams, B.: Diagnosing multiple faults. Artificial Intelligence 32, 97–130 (1987)
Knight, K.M.: Measuring inconsistency. Journal of Philosophical Logic 31, 77–98 (2001)
Knight, K.M.: A theory of inconsistency. PhD thesis, The university of Manchester (2002)
Knight, K.M.: Two information measures for inconsistent sets. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 12, 227–248 (2003)
Konieczny, S., Lang, J., Marquis, P.: Quantifying information and contradiction in propositional logic through epistemic tests. In: Proceedings of the 18th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intellignce (IJCAI 2003), pp. 106–111 (2003)
Konieczny, S., Pino-Pérez, R.: On the logic of merging. In: Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR 1998), pp. 488–498. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1998)
Konieczny, S., Pino-Pérez, R.: Merging information under constraints: a qualitative framework. Journal of Logic and Computation 12(5), 773–808 (2002)
Kraus, S., Lehmann, D., Magidor, M.: Nonmonotonic reasoning, preferential models and cumulative logics. Artificial Intelligence 44, 167–207 (1990)
Kuipers, T. (ed.): What is closer-to-the-truth? Rodopi, Amsterdam (1987)
Kwok, R., Foo, N., Nayak, A.: Coherence of laws. In: Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on AI (IJCAI 2003) (2003)
Lehmann, D., Magidor, M.: What does a conditional knowledge base entail? Artificial Intelligence 55, 1–60 (1992)
Levesque, H.: A logic of implicit and explicit belief. In: Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI 1984), pp. 198–202 (1984)
Lozinskii, E.: Information and evidence in logic systems. Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence 6, 163–193 (1994)
Lozinskii, E.: Resolving contradictions: A plausible semantics for inconsistent systems. Journal of Automated Reasoning 12, 1–31 (1994)
Lozinskii, E.: On knowledge evolution: Acquisition, revision, contraction. Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logic 7, 177–212 (1997)
Makinson, D.: General Pattern in nonmonotonic reasoning. In: Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming, vol. III, pp. 35–110. Clarendon Press, Oxford (1994)
Manor, R., Rescher, N.: On inferences from inconsistent information. Theory and Decision 1, 179–219 (1970)
Marquis, P., Porquet, N.: Computational aspects of quasi-classical entailment. Journal of Applied Non-classical Logics 11, 295–312 (2001)
Papadimitriou, C.: Computational Complexity. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1994)
Paris, J.B.: The uncertain reasoner’s companion: a mathematical perspective. Cambridge Tracts in Theoretical Computer Science, vol. 39. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1994)
Parsons, S., Wooldridge, M., Amgoud, L.: Properties and complexity of some formal inter-agent dialogues. Journal of Logic and Computation (2003)
Popper, K.: Conjectures and Refutation. Routlege and Kegan Paul, London (1963)
Prakken, H., Vreeswijk, G.: Logical systems for defeasible argumentation. In: Gabbay, D. (ed.) Handbook of Philosophical Logic. Kluwer, Dordrecht (2000)
Priest, G.: Minimally inconsistent LP. Studia Logica 50, 321–331 (1991)
Priest, G.: Paraconsistent logic. In: Handbook of Philosophical Logic, vol. 6. Kluwer, Dordrecht (2002)
Reiter, R.: A theory of diagnosis from first principles. Artificial Intelligence 32, 57–95 (1987)
Revesz, P.: On the semantics of arbitration. International Journal of Algebra and Computation 7, 133–160 (1997)
Ryan, M., Schobbens, P.Y.: Belief revision and verisimilitude. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 36(1), 15–29 (1995)
Savage, L.J.: The foundations of statistics, 2nd revised edn. Dover Publications, New York (1971)
Schaerf, M., Cadoli, M.: Tractable reasoning via approximation. Artificial Intelligence 74, 249–310 (1995)
Shafer, G.: A Mathematical Theory of Evidence. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1976)
Shannon, C.: A mathematical theory of communication. Bell System Technical Journal 27, 379–423 (1948)
Spohn, W.: Ordinal conditional functions: a dynamic theory of epistemic states. In: Harper, W.L., Skyrms, B. (eds.) Causation in Decision, Belief Change, and Statistics, vol. 2, pp. 105–134. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1987)
Williams, M.: Iterated theory base change: A computational model. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI 1995), pp. 1541–1547 (1995)
Wong, P., Besnard, P.: Paraconsistent reasoning as an analytic tool. Journal of the Interest Group in Propositional Logic 9, 233–246 (2001)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2005 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hunter, A., Konieczny, S. (2005). Approaches to Measuring Inconsistent Information. In: Bertossi, L., Hunter, A., Schaub, T. (eds) Inconsistency Tolerance. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 3300. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30597-2_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30597-2_7
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-24260-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-30597-2
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)