Object knowledge base revision

crampe1998aInternational audienceA revision framework for object-based knowledge representation languages is presented. It is defined by adapting logical revision to objects and characterised both semantically and syntactically. The syntactic analysis of revision shows that it can be easily interpreted in terms of object structures (e.g. moving classes or enlarging domains). This is the source of the implementation and it enables users to be involved in the revision process

Algorithm for Adapting Cases Represented in a Tractable Description Logic

Case-based reasoning (CBR) based on description logics (DLs) has gained a lot of attention lately. Adaptation is a basic task in the CBR inference that can be modeled as the knowledge base revision problem and solved in propositional logic. However, in DLs, it is still a challenge problem since existing revision operators only work well for strictly restricted DLs of the \emph{DL-Lite} family, and it is difficult to design a revision algorithm which is syntax-independent and fine-grained. In this paper, we present a new method for adaptation based on the DL $\mathcal{EL_{\bot}}$. Following the idea of adaptation as revision, we firstly extend the logical basis for describing cases from propositional logic to the DL $\mathcal{EL_{\bot}}$, and present a formalism for adaptation based on $\mathcal{EL_{\bot}}$. Then we present an adaptation algorithm for this formalism and demonstrate that our algorithm is syntax-independent and fine-grained. Our work provides a logical basis for adaptation in CBR systems where cases and domain knowledge are described by the tractable DL $\mathcal{EL_{\bot}}$.Comment: 21 pages. ICCBR 201

A Rational and Efficient Algorithm for View Revision in Databases

The dynamics of belief and knowledge is one of the major components of any autonomous system that should be able to incorporate new pieces of information. In this paper, we argue that to apply rationality result of belief dynamics theory to various practical problems, it should be generalized in two respects: first of all, it should allow a certain part of belief to be declared as immutable; and second, the belief state need not be deductively closed. Such a generalization of belief dynamics, referred to as base dynamics, is presented, along with the concept of a generalized revision algorithm for Horn knowledge bases. We show that Horn knowledge base dynamics has interesting connection with kernel change and abduction. Finally, we also show that both variants are rational in the sense that they satisfy certain rationality postulates stemming from philosophical works on belief dynamics

Belief Revision in Expressive Knowledge Representation Formalisms

We live in an era of data and information, where an immeasurable amount of discoveries, findings, events, news, and transactions are generated every second. Governments, companies, or individuals have to employ and process all that data for knowledge-based decision-making (i.e. a decision-making process that uses predetermined criteria to measure and ensure the optimal outcome for a specific topic), which then prompt them to view the knowledge as valuable resource. In this knowledge-based view, the capability to create and utilize knowledge is the key source of an organization or individual’s competitive advantage. This dynamic nature of knowledge leads us to the study of belief revision (or belief change), an area which emerged from work in philosophy and then impacted further developments in computer science and artificial intelligence. In belief revision area, the AGM postulates by Alchourrón, Gärdenfors, and Makinson continue to represent a cornerstone in research related to belief change. Katsuno and Mendelzon (K&M) adopted the AGM postulates for changing belief bases and characterized AGM belief base revision in propositional logic over finite signatures. In this thesis, two research directions are considered. In the first, by considering the semantic point of view, we generalize K&M’s approach to the setting of (multiple) base revision in arbitrary Tarskian logics, covering all logics with a classical model-theoretic semantics and hence a wide variety of logics used in knowledge representation and beyond. Our generic formulation applies to various notions of “base”, such as belief sets, arbitrary or finite sets of sentences, or single sentences. The core result is a representation theorem showing a two-way correspondence between AGM base revision operators and certain “assignments”: functions mapping belief bases to total — yet not transitive — “preference” relations between interpretations. Alongside, we present a companion result for the case when the AGM postulate of syntax-independence is abandoned. We also provide a characterization of all logics for which our result can be strengthened to assignments producing transitive preference relations (as in K&M’s original work), giving rise to two more representation theorems for such logics, according to syntax dependence vs. independence. The second research direction in this thesis explores two approaches for revising description logic knowledge bases under fixed-domain semantics, namely model-based approach and individual-based approach. In this logical setting, models of the knowledge bases can be enumerated and can be computed to produce the revision result, semantically. We show a characterization of the AGM revision operator for this logic and present a concrete model-based revision approach via distance between interpretations. In addition, by weakening the KB based on certain domain elements, a novel individual-based revision operator is provided as an alternative approach