×

zbMATH — the first resource for mathematics

Paraconsistency and word puzzles. (English) Zbl 1379.68293
Summary: Word puzzles and the problem of their representations in logic languages have received considerable attention in the last decade (Ponnuru et al. 2004; Shapiro 2011; Baral and Dzifcak 2012; Schwitter 2013). Of special interest is the problem of generating such representations directly from natural language (NL) or controlled natural language (CNL). An interesting variation of this problem, and to the best of our knowledge, scarcely explored variation in this context, is when the input information is inconsistent. In such situations, the existing encodings of word puzzles produce inconsistent representations and break down. In this paper, we bring the well-known type of paraconsistent logics, called Annotated Predicate Calculus (APC) (Kifer and Lozinskii 1992), to bear on the problem. We introduce a new kind of non-monotonic semantics for APC, called consistency preferred stable models and argue that it makes APC into a suitable platform for dealing with inconsistency in word puzzles and, more generally, in NL sentences. We also devise a number of general principles to help the user choose among the different representations of NL sentences, which might seem equivalent but, in fact, behave differently when inconsistent information is taken into account. These principles can be incorporated into existing CNL translators, such as Attempto Controlled English (ACE) (Fuchs et al. 2008) and PENG Light (White and Schwitter 2009). Finally, we show that APC with the consistency preferred stable model semantics can be equivalently embedded in ASP with preferences over stable models, and we use this embedding to implement this version of APC in Clingo (Gebser et al. 2011) and its Asprin add-on (Brewka et al. 2015).

MSC:
68T27 Logic in artificial intelligence
03B53 Paraconsistent logics
03B65 Logic of natural languages
68T50 Natural language processing
Software:
asprin; Potassco; Smodels
PDF BibTeX XML Cite
Full Text: DOI
References:
[1] Baral, C.; Dzifcak, J., Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Conference, KR 2012, Rome, Italy, June 10-14, 2012, Solving puzzles described in English by automated translation to answer set programming and learning how to do that translation, pp., (2012), AAAI Press, Rome, Italy
[2] Belnap, N. D. Jr, Modern uses of multiple-valued logic, A useful four-valued logic, 5-37, (1977), Springer
[3] Blair, H.; Subrahmanian, V., Paraconsistent logic programming, Theoretical Computer Science, 68, 135-154, (1989) · Zbl 0686.68009
[4] Brewka, G.; Delgrande, J. P.; Romero, J.; Schaub, T., Proceedings of the Twenty-Ninth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, January 25-30, 2015, Austin, Texas, USA., asprin: Customizing answer set preferences without a headache, 1467-1474, (2015), AAAI Press, Austin, Texas
[5] C. Guéret, C. P.; Sevaux, M., Programmation linéaire - 65 problèmes d’optimisation modélisés et résolus avec Visual Xpress, 2-212-09202-4, pp., (2000), Eyrolles, France
[6] da Costa, N., On the theory of inconsistent formal systems., Notre Dame J. of Formal Logic, 15, 4, 497-510, (1974) · Zbl 0236.02022
[7] Finkel, R. A.; Marek, V. W.; Truszczynski, M., Constraint lingo: towards high-level constraint programming., Softw., Pract. Exper., 34, 15, 1481-1504, (2004)
[8] Fuchs, N. E.; Kaljurand, K.; Kuhn, T., Reasoning Web, 4th International Summer School 2008, Venice, Italy, September 7-11, 2008, Tutorial Lectures, Attempto controlled English for knowledge representation, 104-124, (2008), Springer, Venice, Italy
[9] Gao, T.; Fodor, P.; Kifer, M., pp., (2016)
[10] Gebser, M.; Kaminski, R.; Kaufmann, B.; Ostrowski, M.; Schaub, T.; Schneider, M., Potassco: the Potsdam answer set solving collection., AI Communications, 24, 2, 107-124, (2011) · Zbl 1215.68214
[11] Beziau, J. Y.; Carnielli, W., Handbook of Paraconsistency (Studies in Logic), pp., (2007), College Publications, United States
[12] Kifer, M.; Lozinskii, E. L., A logic for reasoning with inconsistency., J. Autom. Reasoning, 9, 2, 179-215, (1992) · Zbl 0807.03019
[13] Kifer, M.; Subrahmanian, V. S., Theory of generalized annotated logic programming and its applications., J. Log. Program., 12, 3&4, 335-367, (1992)
[14] Ponnuru, H.; Finkel, R. A.; Marek, V. W.; Truszczynski, M., Proceedings of the International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IC-AI ’04, June 21-24, 2004, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA, Volume 1, Automatic generation of English-language steps in puzzle solving, 437-442, (2004), CSREA Press, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
[15] Priest, G.; Tanaka, K.; Weber, Z.; Zalta, E. N., The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Paraconsistent logic, pp., (2015), Stanford, USA
[16] Schwitter, R., The jobs puzzle: taking on the challenge via controlled natural language processing., Theory and Practice of Logic Programming, 13, 4-5, 487-501, (2013) · Zbl 1295.68191
[17] Shapiro, S. C., Conceptual Structures: Logical, Linguistic, and Computational Issues, 8th International Conference on Conceptual Structures, ICCS 2000, Darmstadt, Germany, August 14-18, 2000, Proceedings, An introduction to sneps 3, 510-524, (2000), Springer, Darmstadt, Germany
[18] Shapiro, S. C., Logical Formalizations of Commonsense Reasoning, Papers from the 2011 AAAI Spring Symposium, California, USA, March 21-23, 2011, The jobs puzzle: A challenge for logical expressibility and automated reasoning, pp., (2011), AAAI, Stanford, California, USA
[19] Soininen, T.; Niemelä, I.; Tiihonen, J.; Sulonen, R., Answer Set Programming, Towards Efficient and Scalable Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, Proceedings of the 1st Intl. ASP’01 Workshop, Stanford, March 26-28, 2001, Representing configuration knowledge with weight constraint rules, pp., (2001), Springer, Stanford, California, USA
[20] Syrjänen, T.; Niemelä, I., Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning, 6th International Conference, LPNMR 2001, Vienna, Austria, September 17-19, 2001, Proceedings, The Smodels system, 434-438, (2001), Springer, Vienna, Austria · Zbl 1010.68797
[21] White, C.; Schwitter, R., Proceedings of ALTA, An update on PENG Light, 80-88, (2009), Springer, Sydney, Australia
[22] Wos, L.; Overbeck, R.; Lusk, E.; Boyle, J., Automated reasoning: Introduction and applications, pp., (1984), Prentice Hall Inc., Old Tappan, NJ, United States
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. It attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming the completeness or perfect precision of the matching.