Inconsistency-Tolerant Belief Revision for Distributed Decision Support

Decision support is the main objective of business intelligence. The facts and rules of knowledge bases at the back end of decision support systems represent beliefs that are subject to revision. Belief revision is called for whenever an inconsistency occurs. Inconsistency may be due to an update that contradicts extant beliefs, or may have remained hidden before being uncovered. In particular, inconsistency is likely to appear in decision support systems based on distributed, mutually independent knowledge sources. If consistency is modeled by business rules, in the form of integrity constraints, then inconsistency can be measured, by sizing either the violated instances of constraints or the beliefs that cause constraint violations. Measures that quantify inconsistency enable a distinction of different degrees of integrity violations, and thus a relaxation of the intolerant all-or-nothing attitude of classical logic toward consistency. They also provide a logical foundation and justification of maintaining and reasoning with beliefs that possibly are inconsistent, without risking to lead to decisions that suffer too much from contradictory sources.

[1]  Hendrik Decker.  Causes of the Violation of Integrity Constraints for Supporting the Quality of Databases , 2011, ICCSA.

[2]  Hendrik Decker,et al.  Inconsistency-Tolerant Integrity Checking , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering.

[3]  Joseph Y. Halpern,et al.  Modeling Belief in Dynamic Systems, Part II: Revisions and Update , 1999, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[4]  Anthony Hunter,et al.  Approaches to Measuring Inconsistent Information , 2005, Inconsistency Tolerance.

[5]  Hendrik Decker,et al.  Modeling, Measuring and Monitoring the Quality of Information , 2009, ER Workshops.

[6]  Francesc D. Muñoz-Escoí,et al.  Revisiting and Improving a Result on Integrity Preservation by Concurrent Transactions , 2010, OTM Workshops.

[7]  Dov M. Gabbay,et al.  What Is Negation as Failure? , 2012, Logic Programs, Norms and Action.

[8]  Matthias Thimm,et al.  Inconsistency measures for probabilistic logics , 2013, Artif. Intell..

[9]  Serge Abiteboul,et al.  Foundations of Databases , 1994 .

[10]  Hendrik Decker,et al.  Enabling Business Rules for Concurrent Transactions , 2011, 2011 International Conference on P2P, Parallel, Grid, Cloud and Internet Computing.

[11]  P G rdenfors,et al.  Knowledge in flux: modeling the dynamics of epistemic states , 1988 .

[12]  Rohit Parikh,et al.  An Inconsistency Tolerant Model for Belief Representation and Belief Revision , 1999, IJCAI.

[13]  Reinhard Kahle,et al.  Structured belief bases , 2004 .

[14]  Dan Suciu,et al.  Believe It or Not: Adding Belief Annotations to Databases , 2009, Proc. VLDB Endow..