In this chapter, we summarize the research on querying inconsistent databases we have been conducting over the last five years. The formal framework we have used is based on two concepts: repair and consistent query answer. We describe different approaches to the issue of computing consistent query answers: query transformation, logic programming, inference in annotated logics, and specialized algorithms. We also characterize the computational complexity of this problem. Finally, we discuss related research in artificial intelligence, databases, and logic programming.

In a multi-agent environment, where self-motivated agents try to pursue their own goals, cooperation cannot be taken for granted. Cooperation must be planned for and achieved through communication and negotiation. We present a logical model of the mental states of the agents based on a representation of their beliefs, desires, intentions, and goals. We present argumentation as an iterative process emerging from exchanges among agents to persuade each other and bring about a change in intentions. We look at argumentation as a mechanism for achieving cooperation and agreements. Using categories identified from human multi-agent negotiation, we demonstrate how the logic can be used to specify argument formulation and evaluation. We also illustrate how the developed logic can be used to describe different types of agents. Furthermore, we present a general Automated Negotiation Agent which we implemented, based on the logical model. Using this system, a user can analyze and explore differe...

This work proposes an axiomatic characterization of merging operators. It underlines the differences between arbitration operators and majority operators. A representation theorem is stated showing that each merging operator corresponds to a family of partial preorders on interpretations. Examples of operators are given. They show the consistency of the axiomatic characterization. A new merging operator 4GMax is provided. It is proved that it is actually an arbitration operator. 1 Introduction In a growing number of applications, we face conflicting information coming from several sources. The problem is to reach a coherent piece of information from these contradicting ones. A lot of different merging methods have already been given [BI84, LMa, BKM91, BKMS92, Sub94]. Instead of giving one particular merging method we propose, in this paper, a characterization of such methods following the rationality of the postulates they satisfy. We shall call merging operators those meth...

This article is a revised and extended version of our earlier work which appeared in Proceedings of the 3rd International Symposium on Requirements Engineering (1997), pages 78 -- 86; Authors' addresses: A. Hunter, Department of Computer Science, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK; email: A.Hunter@cs.ucl.ac.uk; B. Nuseibeh, Department of Computing, Imperial College, 180 Queen's Gate, London, SW7 2BZ, UK; email: ban@doc.ic.ac.uk.

We address the problem of minimal-change integrity maintenance in the context of integrity constraints in relational databases. We assume that integrity-restoration actions are limited to tuple deletions. We focus on two basic computational issues: repair checking (is a database instance a repair of a given database?) and consistent query answers [3] (is a tuple an answer to a given query in every repair of a given database?). We study the computational complexity of both problems, delineating the boundary between the tractable and the intractable cases. We consider denial constraints, general functional and inclusion dependencies, as well as key and foreign key constraints. Our results shed light on the computational feasibility of minimal-change integrity maintenance. The tractable cases should lead to practical implementations. The intractability results highlight the inherent limitations of any integrity enforcement mechanism, e.g., triggers or referential constraint actions, as a way of performing minimal-change integrity maintenance. 1

: This paper presents and discusses several methods for reasoning from inconsistent knowledge bases. A so-called argumentative-consequence relation, taking into account the existence of consistent arguments in favor of a conclusion and the absence of consistent arguments in favor of its contrary, is particularly investigated. Flat knowledge bases, i.e. without any priority between their elements, as well as prioritized ones where some elements are considered as more strongly entrenched than others are studied under the different consequence relations which are considered. Lastly a paraconsistent-like treatment of prioritized knowledge bases is proposed, where both the level of entrenchment and the level of paraconsistency attached to a formula are propagated. The priority levels are handled in the framework of possibility theory. Keywords: Inconsistency; consequence relation; prioritized knowledge base; uncertainty; possibilistic logic; possibility theory. Submitted to the Ninth Annual...

: Revision and update operators add new information to some old information represented by a logical theory. Katsuno and Mendelzon show that both revision and update operators can be characterized as accomplishing a minimal change in the old information to accommodate the new information. Arbitration operators add two or more weighted informations together where the weights indicate the relative importance of the informations rather than a strict priority. This paper shows that arbitration operators can be also characterized as accomplishing a minimal change. The operator of model-fitting is also defined and analyzed in the paper. 1 Introduction Arbitration is the process of settling a conflict between two or more persons. Arbitration occurs in many situations. For example, settling a labor dispute by an outsider, reaching a verdict in a trial, evaluating several alternative research hypotheses, negotiating an international peace agreement, or setting the price of a product in a compe...

. At a workshop held in Toulouse, France in 1977, Gallaire, Minker and Nicolas stated that logic and databases was a field in its own right (see [131]). This was the first time that this designation was made. The impetus for this started approximately twenty years ago in 1976 when I visited Gallaire and Nicolas in Toulouse, France, which culminated in a workshop held in Toulouse, France in 1977. It is appropriate, then to provide an assessment as to what has been achieved in the twenty years since the field started as a distinct discipline. In this retrospective I shall review developments that have taken place in the field, assess the contributions that have been made, consider the status of implementations of deductive databases and discuss the future of work in this area. 1 Introduction As described in [234], the use of logic and deduction in databases started in the late 1960s. Prominent among the developments was the work by Levien and Maron [202, 203, 199, 200, 201] and Kuhns [1...

Abstract Databases may be inconsistent with respect to a given set of integrity constraints. Nevertheless, most of the data may be consistent. In this paper we show how to specify consistent data and how to query a relational database in such a way that only consistent data is retrieved. The specification and queries are based on disjunctive extended logic programs with positive and negative exceptions that generalize those previously introduced by Kowalski and Sadri.

A common practice for resolving conflicts among a group of agents is to let the majority decide. We formalize this principle and apply it to the problem of merging the knowledge of multiple agents. We then postulate logical properties that all knowledge merging operators should satisfy and give a model-theoretic characterization of all merging operators that satisfy the postulates. It turns out that the operators that satisfy the postulates are precisely those that induce a certain kind of partial pre-order over the set of possible worlds such that the models of the merged knowledge base are the possible worlds that are minimal with respect to the pre-order. Then, we review several previous approaches and study them in light of the proposed postulates. We then present a particular method for knowledge merging, CMerge, that satisfies all the postulates. We show by example that CMerge appears to resolve conflicts among knowledge bases in a plausible way. Finally, we show that CMerge can ...