2012
DOI: 10.1016/j.fss.2011.10.012
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Measuring and repairing inconsistency in knowledge bases with graded truth

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
3
3

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Being the fuzzy realm a matter of degrees, a number of papers have focused on measuring the degree of inconsistency of a set of fuzzy rules, and a number of different inconsistency indices have been introduced. For instance Kubler et al 13 introduce the so‐called knowledge‐based consistency index for deriving priorities from fuzzy pairwise comparison matrices in multiple‐criteria decision‐making problems; other approaches introduce means for both measuring and repairing inconsistency, for example, Picado‐Muiño 14 presents a family of measures aimed at determining the amount of inconsistency in knowledge bases with graded truth and considers minimal adjustments in the truth degrees of the propositions necessary to make the knowledge‐base to be consistent within a given frame (in that case the Łukasiewicz semantics); last but not least 15 deals with the definition of measures of inconsistency in the residuated‐logic‐programming paradigm under the fuzzy answer set semantics and provides a soft mechanism to control the amount of information inferred, thus controlling the inconsistencies by modifying slightly the truth values of some rules. The number of possible measures of inconsistency that can be found in the literature somehow suggests the existence of a problem with inconsistency in a fuzzy setting, namely, its definition: There is not a consensus on how to interpret inconsistency in a fuzzy system.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Being the fuzzy realm a matter of degrees, a number of papers have focused on measuring the degree of inconsistency of a set of fuzzy rules, and a number of different inconsistency indices have been introduced. For instance Kubler et al 13 introduce the so‐called knowledge‐based consistency index for deriving priorities from fuzzy pairwise comparison matrices in multiple‐criteria decision‐making problems; other approaches introduce means for both measuring and repairing inconsistency, for example, Picado‐Muiño 14 presents a family of measures aimed at determining the amount of inconsistency in knowledge bases with graded truth and considers minimal adjustments in the truth degrees of the propositions necessary to make the knowledge‐base to be consistent within a given frame (in that case the Łukasiewicz semantics); last but not least 15 deals with the definition of measures of inconsistency in the residuated‐logic‐programming paradigm under the fuzzy answer set semantics and provides a soft mechanism to control the amount of information inferred, thus controlling the inconsistencies by modifying slightly the truth values of some rules. The number of possible measures of inconsistency that can be found in the literature somehow suggests the existence of a problem with inconsistency in a fuzzy setting, namely, its definition: There is not a consensus on how to interpret inconsistency in a fuzzy system.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Onceinconsistenciesarefoundinaknowledgebase,theproblembecomeshowto dealwiththem.Severalapproachestodealingwithknowninconsistencieshavebeen used.Someinvolvealteringtheknowledgebasesoastoremovetheinconsistency, such as the "graded truth" in Picado (2012); others involve altering the inferences performedusingtheknowledgeortherulesetitselftotaketheinconsistenciesinto account,aswiththe"beliefrevision"inDecker&deJuan-Marîn(2013).Ourpaper focusesonlyonthedetectionofaninconsistency,asanecessaryfirststep.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%