Belief Base Revision for Further Improvement of Unified Answer Set Programming

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2003.04369v2
• Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 11:05:36 GMT
• Title: Belief Base Revision for Further Improvement of Unified Answer Set Programming
• Authors: Kumar Sankar Ray, Sandip Paul, Diganta Saha
• Abstract summary: The base revision operator is developed using Removed Set Revision strategy. The operator is characterized by respect to the postulates for base revisions operator satisfies.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: A belief base revision is developed. The belief base is represented using Unified Answer Set Programs which is capable of representing imprecise and uncertain information and perform nonomonotonic reasoning with them. The base revision operator is developed using Removed Set Revision strategy. The operator is characterized with respect to the postulates for base revisions operator satisfies.

Related papers

• Credibility-Limited Revision for Epistemic Spaces [0.0]
  We extend the class of credibility-limited revision operators in a way that all AGM revision operators are included. A semantic characterization of extended credibility-limited revision operators that employ total preorders on possible worlds is presented.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-11T09:15:43Z)
• Optimal Baseline Corrections for Off-Policy Contextual Bandits [61.740094604552475]
  We aim to learn decision policies that optimize an unbiased offline estimate of an online reward metric. We propose a single framework built on their equivalence in learning scenarios. Our framework enables us to characterize the variance-optimal unbiased estimator and provide a closed-form solution for it.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-09T12:52:22Z)
• SCREWS: A Modular Framework for Reasoning with Revisions [58.698199183147935]
  We present SCREWS, a modular framework for reasoning with revisions. We show that SCREWS unifies several previous approaches under a common framework. We evaluate our framework with state-of-the-art LLMs on a diverse set of reasoning tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-20T15:59:54Z)
• ROSCOE: A Suite of Metrics for Scoring Step-by-Step Reasoning [63.77667876176978]
  Large language models show improved downstream task interpretability when prompted to generate step-by-step reasoning to justify their final answers. These reasoning steps greatly improve model interpretability and verification, but objectively studying their correctness is difficult. We present ROS, a suite of interpretable, unsupervised automatic scores that improve and extend previous text generation evaluation metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-15T15:52:39Z)
• Knowledge-enhanced Iterative Instruction Generation and Reasoning for Knowledge Base Question Answering [43.72266327778216]
  Multi-hop Knowledge Base Question Answering aims to find the answer entity in a knowledge base which is several hops from the topic entity mentioned in the question. Existing Retrieval-based approaches first generate instructions from the question and then use them to guide the multi-hop reasoning on the knowledge graph. We do experiments on two multi-hop KBQA benchmarks and outperform the existing approaches, becoming the new-state-of-the-art.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-09-07T09:02:45Z)
• On Limited Non-Prioritised Belief Revision Operators with Dynamic Scope [2.7071541526963805]
  We introduce the concept of dynamic-limited revision, which are revisions expressible by a total preorder over a limited set of worlds. For a belief change operator, we consider the scope, which consists of those beliefs which yield success of revision. We show that for each set satisfying single sentence closure and disjunction completeness there exists a dynamic-limited revision having the union of this set with the beliefs set as scope.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-08-17T17:22:29Z)
• GroupifyVAE: from Group-based Definition to VAE-based Unsupervised Representation Disentanglement [91.9003001845855]
  VAE-based unsupervised disentanglement can not be achieved without introducing other inductive bias. We address VAE-based unsupervised disentanglement by leveraging the constraints derived from the Group Theory based definition as the non-probabilistic inductive bias. We train 1800 models covering the most prominent VAE-based models on five datasets to verify the effectiveness of our method.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-02-20T09:49:51Z)
• Hierarchical Poset Decoding for Compositional Generalization in Language [52.13611501363484]
  We formalize human language understanding as a structured prediction task where the output is a partially ordered set (poset) Current encoder-decoder architectures do not take the poset structure of semantics into account properly. We propose a novel hierarchical poset decoding paradigm for compositional generalization in language.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-15T14:34:26Z)
• On the use of evidence theory in belief base revision [0.0]
  We propose the idea of credible belief base revision yielding to define two new formula-based revision operators. These operators stem from consistent subbases maximal with respect to credibility instead of set inclusion and cardinality.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-09-24T12:45:32Z)
• A Revised Generative Evaluation of Visual Dialogue [80.17353102854405]
  We propose a revised evaluation scheme for the VisDial dataset. We measure consensus between answers generated by the model and a set of relevant answers. We release these sets and code for the revised evaluation scheme as DenseVisDial.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-20T13:26:45Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.