Cost-Based Semantics for Querying Inconsistent Weighted Knowledge Bases

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2407.20754v2
• Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2024 08:26:28 GMT
• Title: Cost-Based Semantics for Querying Inconsistent Weighted Knowledge Bases
• Authors: Meghyn Bienvenu, Camille Bourgaux, Robin Jean,
• Abstract summary: We consider weighted knowledge bases in which both axioms and assertions have (possibly infinite) weights. Two notions of certain and possible answer are defined by either considering interpretations whose cost does not exceed a given bound. Our main contribution is a comprehensive analysis of the combined and data complexity of bounded cost satisfiability and certain and possible answer recognition.
• Score: 5.222978725954348
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: In this paper, we explore a quantitative approach to querying inconsistent description logic knowledge bases. We consider weighted knowledge bases in which both axioms and assertions have (possibly infinite) weights, which are used to assign a cost to each interpretation based upon the axioms and assertions it violates. Two notions of certain and possible answer are defined by either considering interpretations whose cost does not exceed a given bound or restricting attention to optimal-cost interpretations. Our main contribution is a comprehensive analysis of the combined and data complexity of bounded cost satisfiability and certain and possible answer recognition, for description logics between ELbot and ALCO.

Related papers

• Does Faithfulness Conflict with Plausibility? An Empirical Study in Explainable AI across NLP Tasks [9.979726030996051]
  We show that Shapley value and LIME could attain greater faithfulness and plausibility. Our findings suggest that rather than optimizing for one dimension at the expense of the other, we could seek to optimize explainability algorithms with dual objectives.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-29T20:28:42Z)
• Soft Reasoning on Uncertain Knowledge Graphs [85.1968214421899]
  We study the setting of soft queries on uncertain knowledge, which is motivated by the establishment of soft constraint programming. We propose an ML-based approach with both forward inference and backward calibration to answer soft queries on large-scale, incomplete, and uncertain knowledge graphs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-03T13:13:53Z)
• Modeling Hierarchical Reasoning Chains by Linking Discourse Units and Key Phrases for Reading Comprehension [80.99865844249106]
  We propose a holistic graph network (HGN) which deals with context at both discourse level and word level, as the basis for logical reasoning. Specifically, node-level and type-level relations, which can be interpreted as bridges in the reasoning process, are modeled by a hierarchical interaction mechanism.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-21T07:34:27Z)
• Enriching Disentanglement: From Logical Definitions to Quantitative Metrics [59.12308034729482]
  Disentangling the explanatory factors in complex data is a promising approach for data-efficient representation learning. We establish relationships between logical definitions and quantitative metrics to derive theoretically grounded disentanglement metrics. We empirically demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed metrics by isolating different aspects of disentangled representations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-19T08:22:23Z)
• Complexity and scalability of defeasible reasoning in many-valued weighted knowledge bases with typicality [4.447467536572624]
  Weighted knowledge bases for description logics with typicality provide a logical interpretation of MultiLayer Perceptrons. ASP has been shown to be suitable for addressing defeasible reasoning in the finitely many-valued case. This paper provides a $PNP[log]$-completeness result and new ASP encodings that deal with weighted knowledge bases with large search spaces.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-08T12:08:53Z)
• From LSAT: The Progress and Challenges of Complex Reasoning [56.07448735248901]
  We study the three challenging and domain-general tasks of the Law School Admission Test (LSAT), including analytical reasoning, logical reasoning and reading comprehension. We propose a hybrid reasoning system to integrate these three tasks and achieve impressive overall performance on the LSAT tests.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-08-02T05:43:03Z)
• Discrete Reasoning Templates for Natural Language Understanding [79.07883990966077]
  We present an approach that reasons about complex questions by decomposing them to simpler subquestions. We derive the final answer according to instructions in a predefined reasoning template. We show that our approach is competitive with the state-of-the-art while being interpretable and requires little supervision.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-05T18:56:56Z)
• QED: A Framework and Dataset for Explanations in Question Answering [27.85923397716627]
  We release an expert-annotated dataset of QED explanations built upon a subset of the Google Natural Questions dataset. A promising result suggests that training on a relatively small amount of QED data can improve question answering.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-09-08T23:34:18Z)
• Foundations of Reasoning with Uncertainty via Real-valued Logics [70.43924776071616]
  We give a sound and strongly complete axiomatization that can be parametrized to cover essentially every real-valued logic. Our class of sentences are very rich, and each describes a set of possible real values for a collection of formulas of the real-valued logic.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-08-06T02:13:11Z)

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.