Formas Normais Primárias Aplicadas à Fusão de Crenças

• Jerusa Marchi UFSC
• Guilherme Bittencourt UFSC
• Laurent Perrussel Université Toulouse I

Resumo

Em sistemas baseados em conhecimento, processos de fusão de crenças tem por objetivo agregar informações, possivelmente contraditórias, vindas de fontes variadas. A base resultante é dada pela aplicação de um critério de proximidade entre as bases de crenças que representam a informação a ser agregada e a base que contém as restrições de integridade, observando o objetivo do procedimento de fusão. A noção de distância entre bases de crenças é, então, uma questão importante no problema da fusão de crenças. O objetivo deste artigo é, inicialmente, propor uma forma sintática de calcular distâncias entre bases de crenças e, em seguida, apresentar uma nova medida de distância que considera a importância de cada símbolo proposicional na base de crenças.

Referências

Bittencourt, G. (1998). Concurrent inference through dual transformation. Logic Journal of the IGPL, 6(6):795–834.

Bittencourt, G., Marchi, J., and Padilha, R. S. (2003). A Syntactic Approach to Satisfaction. In Konev, B. and Schimidt, R., editors, 4th International Workshop on the Implementation of Logic (LPAR03), pages 18–32. University of Liverpool and University of Manchester.

Bittencourt, G., Perrussel, L., and Marchi, J. (2004). A syntactical approach to revision. In Mántaras, R. L. and Saitta, L., editors, Proceedings of the 16th Europ. Conf. on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI’04), pages 788–792, Valencia, Spain. IOS Press.

Dalal, M. (1988). Investigations Into a Theory of Knowledge Base Revision: Preliminary Report. In Rosenbloom, P. and Szolovits, P., editors, Proceedings of the 7th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI’98), volume 2, pages 475–479, Menlo Park, California. AAAI Press.

Darwiche, A. and Marquis, P. (2001). A Perspective on Knowledge Compilation. In Proceedings of the 17th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI’01), pages 175–182, Seattle, Washington, USA.

Fourman, M. (2000). Propositional planning. In AIPS-Workshop on ModelTheoretic Approaches to Planning, pages 10–17.

Konieczny, S. and Pérez, R. P. (2002). Merging information under constraints: a logical framework. Journal of Logic and Computation, 12(5):773–808.

Liberatore, P. and Schaerf, M. (1995). Arbitration: A commutative operator for belief revision. In Proceedings of the Second World Conference on the Fundamentals of Artificial Intelligence (WOCFAI’1995, pages 217–228.

Liberatore, P. and Schaerf, M. (1998). Arbitration (or how to merge knowledge bases). IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 10(1):76–90.

Lin, J. and Mendelzon, A. O. (1999). Knowledge base merging by majority. In In Dynamic Worlds: From the Frame Problem to Knowledge Management. Kluwer.

Marchi, J., Bittencourt, G., and Perrussel, L. (2005). A syntactical approach to belief update. In Gelbukh, A., Álvaro Albornoz, and Terashima-Marín, H., editors, Proceedings of the Mexican International Conference on Artificial Intelligence (MICAI’05), pages 142–151, Monterrey, Mexico. Springer Verlag LNAI 3789.

Perrussel, L., Marchi, J., and Bittencourt, G. (2008). Quantum-based belief merging. In Proceedings of the 11th Ibero-American Conference on AI (IBERAMIA’08), pages 21–30, Lisbon, Portugal. Springer-Verlag.

Revesz, P. Z. (1993). On the semantics of theory change: Arbitration between old and new information. In In Proceedings of the Twelfth ACM SIGACT-SIGMOD-SIGART Symposium on Principles of Databases, pages 71–82.