This Article 
   
 Share 
   
 Bibliographic References 
   
 Add to: 
 
Digg
Furl
Spurl
Blink
Simpy
Google
Del.icio.us
Y!MyWeb
 
 Search 
   
Arbitration (or How to Merge Knowledge Bases)
January/February 1998 (vol. 10 no. 1)
pp. 76-90

Abstract—Knowledge-based systems must be able to "intelligently" manage a large amount of information coming from different sources and at different moments in time. Intelligent systems must be able to cope with a changing world by adopting a "principled" strategy. Many formalisms have been put forward in the artificial intelligence (AI) and database (DB) literature to address this problem. Among them, belief revision is one of the most successful frameworks to deal with dynamically changing worlds. Formal properties of belief revision have been investigated by Alchourron, Gärdenfors, and Makinson, who put forward a set of postulates stating the properties that a belief revision operator should satisfy. Among these properties, a basic assumption of revision is that the new piece of information is totally reliable and, therefore, must be in the revised knowledge base. Different principles must be applied when there are two different sources of information and each one has a different view of the situation—the two views contradicting each other. If we do not have any reason to consider any of the sources completely unreliable, the best we can do is to "merge" the two views in a new and consistent one, trying to preserve as much information as possible. We call this merging process arbitration. In this paper, we investigate the properties that any arbitration operator should satisfy. In the style of Alchourron, Gärdenfors, and Makinson we propose a set of postulates, analyze their properties, and propose actual operators for arbitration.

[1] P. Liberatore and M. Schaerf, "Arbitration: A Commutative Operator for Belief Revision," Proc. WOCFAI '95, Second World Conf. Fundamentals of Artificial Intelligence, pp. 217-228, 1995.
[2] A. Silberschatz,M. Stonebraker, and J. D. Ullman (1991), “, Database Systems: Achievements and Opportunities,” Communications of the ACM, vol. 34, no. 10, pp. 110-120.
[3] C.E. Alchourrón, P. Gärdenfors, and D. Makinson, "On the Logic of Theory Change: Partial Meet Contraction and Revision Functions," J. Symbolic Logic, vol. 50, pp. 510-530, 1985.
[4] P. Gärdenfors, Knowledge in Flux: Modeling the Dynamics of Epistemic States.Cambridge, Mass.: Bradford Books, MIT Press, 1988.
[5] H. Katsuno and A.O. Mendelzon, "On the Difference Between Updating a Knowledge Base and Revising It," Proc. KR '91, Second Int'l Conf. Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, pp. 387-394, 1991.
[6] R. Fagin, J.D. Ullman, and M. Vardi, "On the Semantics of Updates in Database," Proc. ACM Symp. Principles Database Systems, pp. 352-365.New York: ACM, 1983.
[7] M.L. Ginsberg, “Counterfactuals,” Artificial Intelligence, vol. 30, pp. 35–79, 1986.
[8] M. Dalal, "Investigations into a Theory of Knowledge Base Revision: Preliminary Report," Proc. AAAI '88, Seventh Nat'l Conf. Artificial Intelligence, pp. 475-479, 1988.
[9] K. Satoh, "Nonmonotonic Reasoning by Minimal Belief Revision," Proc. FGCS '88, Int'l Conf. Fifth Generation Computer Systems, pp. 455-462, 1988.
[10] P.Z. Revesz, "On the Semantics of Theory Change: Arbitration Between Old and New Information," Proc. PODS '93, 12th ACM SIGACT SIGMOD SIGART Symp. Principles of Database Systems, pp. 71-82, 1993.
[11] H. Katsuno and A.O. Mendelzon, "Propositional Knowledge Base Revision and Minimal Change," Artificial Intelligence J., vol. 52, pp. 263-294, 1991.
[12] T. Eiter and G. Gottlob, "On the Complexity of Propositional Knowledge Base Revision, Updates, and Conterfactuals," Artificial Intelligence J., vol. 57, pp. 227-270, 1992.
[13] A. Borgida, “Language Features for Flexible Handling of Exceptions in Information Systems,” ACM Trans. Database Systems, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 565–603, Dec. 1985.
[14] K.D. Forbus, "Introducing Actions into Qualitative Simulation," Proc. 11th IJCAI '89, 11th Int'l Joint Conf. Artificial Intelligence, pp. 1,273-1,278, 1989.
[15] V.S. Subrahmanian, "Amalgamating Knowledge Bases," ACM Trans. Database Systems, 1994.

Index Terms:
Knowledge representation, belief revision, merging of knowledge bases, databases integration, arbitration operators.
Citation:
Paolo Liberatore, Marco Schaerf, "Arbitration (or How to Merge Knowledge Bases)," IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 76-90, Jan.-Feb. 1998, doi:10.1109/69.667090
Usage of this product signifies your acceptance of the Terms of Use.