Abstract
In many scenarios where the integration of information into a knowledge base (KB) leads to inconsistencies there is a need to change the KB minimally. In belief revision, relevance postulates meet the minimality requirement by restricting the elimination of KB elements to those that are relevant for the incoming information. This paper focuses on two minimality postulates in an ontology revision scenario in which conflicts are caused by ambiguous use of symbols: a relevance postulate and a generalized inclusion postulate which limits the creativity of the operators. Both postulates exploit the (satisfiably) equivalent representation of a first-order logic KB by its prime implicates, which, intuitively, represent the most atomic logical components of the KB. The paper shows that reinterpretation operators (which are ontology revision operators) fulfill both postulates. Copyright © 2016, Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (www.aaai.org). All rights reserved.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Title of host publication | Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Conference, KR 2016, Cape Town, South Africa, April 25-29 |
| Editors | Chitta Baral, James P. Delgrande, Frank Wolter |
| Number of pages | 4 |
| Publisher | AAAI Press |
| Publication date | 01.04.2016 |
| Pages | 589-592 |
| Publication status | Published - 01.04.2016 |
| Event | 15th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning - Cape Town, South Africa Duration: 25.04.2016 → 29.04.2016 Conference number: 125135 |
