Inconsistency arises in many areas in advanced computing. Often inconsistency is unwanted, for example in the specification for a plan or in sensor fusion in robotics; however, sometimes inconsistency is useful. Whether inconsistency is unwanted or useful, there is a need to develop tolerance to inconsistency in application technologies such as databases, knowledge bases, and software systems. To address this situation, inconsistency tolerance is being built on foundational technologies for identifying and analyzing inconsistency in information, for representing and reasoning with inconsistent information, for resolving inconsistent information, and for merging inconsistent information.

The idea for this book arose out of a Dagstuhl Seminar on the topic held in summer 2003. The nine chapters in this first book devoted to the subject of inconsistency tolerance were carefully invited and anonymously reviewed. The book provides an exciting introduction to this new field.

Uncertaintyisanincreasinglyimportantresearchtopicinmanyareasofc- puterscience. Manyformalismsarebeingdeveloped,withmuchinterestatthe theoryleveldirectedatdevelopingabetterunderstandingoftheformalismsand identifyingrelationshipsbetweenformalisms,andatthetechnologyleveldirected atdevelopingsoftwaretoolsforformalismsandapplicationsofformalisms. ThemainEuropeanforumforthesubjectistheEuropeanConferenceon SymbolicandQuantitativeApproachestoReasoningandUncertainty(EC- SQARU). FollowingthesuccessofthepreviousECSQARUconferences,heldin Marseilles(1991),Granada(1993),Fribourg(1995),andBonn(1997),the?fth conferenceintheserieswasheldatUniversityCollegeLondoninJuly1999. ThisvolumecontainspapersacceptedforpresentationatECSQARU'99. In additiontothemainconference,twoworkshopswereheld. The?rstwason DecisionTheoreticandGameTheoreticAgents,chairedbySimonParsonsand MikeWooldridge,andthesecondwasonLogicalandUncertaintyModelsfor InformationSystems,chairedbyFabioCrestaniandMouniaLalmas. Selected papersfromtheworkshopsarealsoincludedintheseproceedings. Weareindebitedtotheprogrammmecommitteefortheire?ortinorganising theprogramme,totheinvitedspeakers,andtothepresentersofthetutorials. Furthermore,wegratefullyacknowledgethecontributionofthemanyreferees whowereinvolvedinthereviewingprocess. Finallywewouldliketothankthe DepartmentofComputerScienceatUniversityCollegeLondonforadminist- tivesupport. ProgrammeCommittee TheprogrammecommitteewaschairedbyAnthonyHunter(UniversityCollege London),andcomprisedDovGabbay(King'sCollegeLondon),FinnJensen (AalborgUniversity),RudolfKruse(UniversityofMagdeburg),SimonParsons (QueenMary,UniversityofLondon)HenriPrade(IRIT,Toulouse),Torsten Schaub(UniversityofPotsdam),andPhilippeSmets(ULB,Bruxelles). Reviewers Theprogrammecommitteeisverygratefulforallthehardworkcontributed bythereviewers. Hopefully,wehavenotmissedanyonefromthefollowing list:BruceD'Ambrosio,FlorenceBannay,SalemBenferhat,PhilippeBesnard, HuguesBersini,ChristianBorgelt,RachelBourne,StefanBrass,LaurenceCholvy, RogerCooke,AdnanDarwiche,YannisDimopoulos,JurgenDix,DidierDubois, UweEgly,LindavanderGaag,JoergGebhardt,SiegfriedGottwald,RolfHaenni, Jean-YvesJa?ray,RadimJirousek,RuthKempson,U?eKjaerulf,FrankK- wonn,AljoschaKlose,JuergKohlas,PaulKrause,GerhardLakemeyer,Mounia Lalmas,JeromeLang,KimG. Larsen,NorbertLehmann,T. Y. Lin,Thomas Linke,KhalidMellouli,JeromeMengin,J. -J. Ch. Meyer,SanjayModgil,Yves Moinard,Sera?nMoral,DetlefNauck,AnnNicholson,PascalNicolas,Dennis VI Preface Nilsson,KristianG. Olesen,RainerPalm,ZdzislawPawlak,VincentRisch,Regis Sabbadin,CamillaSchwind,PrakashP. Shenoy,MilanStudeny,HeikoTimm, HansTompits,MarcoValtorta,andCeesWitteven. April1999 AnthonyHunterandSimonParsons TableofContents Onthedynamicsofdefaultreasoning GrigorisAntoniou...1 Non-monotonicandparaconsistentreasoning:Frombasicentailmentsto plausiblerelations OferArieliandArnonAvron ...11 AcomparisonofsystematicandlocalsearchalgorithmsforregularCNF formulas Ram'onB'ejarandFelipMany'a...22 Query-answeringinprioritizeddefaultlogic FaridBenhammadi,PascalNicolasandTorstenSchaub...32 Updatingdirectedbeliefnetworks BoutheinaBenYaghlaneandKhaledMellouli...43 Inferringcausalexplanations PhilippeBesnardandMarie-OdileCordier...55 Acritiqueofinductivecausation ChristianBorgeltandRudolfKruse...68 Connectinglexicographicwithmaximumentropyentailment RachelA. BourneandSimonParsons...80 Avoidingnon-groundvariables StefanBruning .. andTorstenSchaub...92 Anchoringsymbolstovisiondatabyfuzzylogic SilviaCoradeschiandAlessandroSa?otti...104 Filteringvsrevisionandupdate:Letusdebate! CorineCossartandCatherineTessier...116 Irrelevanceandindependenceaxiomsinquasi-Bayesiantheory FabioG. Cozman...128 Assessingthevalueofacandidate:Aqualitativepossibilisticapproach DidierDubois,MichelGrabischandHenriPrade...137 VIII TableofContents Learningdefaulttheories B'eatriceDuvalandPascalNicolas...148 Knowledgerepresentationforinductivelearning PeterA. Flach...160 Handling inconsistency e?ciently in the incremental construction of strati?ed beliefbases EricGr'egoire...168 Roughknowledgediscoveryandapplications J. W. GuanandD. A. Bell...179 GradientdescenttrainingofBayesiannetworks FinnV. Jensen...190 Opendefaulttheoriesovercloseddomains:Anextendedabstract MichaelKaminski...201 Shopboteconomics Je?reyO. KephartandAmyR. Greenwald...208 OptimizedalgorithmforlearningBayesiannetworkfromdata F'ediaKhalfallahandKhaledMellouli...221 Mergingwithintegrityconstraints S'ebastienKoniecznyandRam'onPinoP'erez...233 Boolean-likeinterpretationofSugenointegral IvanKramosil...245 AnalternativetooutwardpropagationforDempster-Shaferbelieffunctions NorbertLehmannandRolfHaenni...256 Onbottom-uppre-processingtechniquesforautomateddefaultreasoning ThomasLinkeandTorstenSchaub...2 68 Probabilisitclogicprogrammingundermaximumentropy ThomasLukasiewiczandGabrieleKern-Isberner...279 Lazypropagationandindependenceofcausalin?uence AndersL. MadsenandBruceD'Ambrosio...293 TableofContents IX AMonteCarloalgorithmforcombiningDempster-Shaferbeliefbasedon approximatepre-computation Seraf'?nMoralandAntonioSalmer'on...305 Anextensionofalinguisticnegationmodelallowingustodenynuanced propertycombinations DanielPacholczyk...316 Argumentationandqualitativedecisionmaking SimonParsonsandShawGreen...328 Handling di?erent forms of uncertainty in regression analysis: A fuzzy belief structureapproach SimonPetit-RenaudandThierryDenoeux...340 State recognition in discrete dynamical systems using Petri nets and evidence theory Mich'eleRombaut,ImanJarkassandThierryDenoeux...352 Robotnavigationandmapbuildingwiththeeventcalculus MurrayShanahanandMarkWitkowski...362 Informationfusioninthecontextofstockindexprediction StefanSiekmann,J..orgGebhardtandRudolfKruse...363 Defeasiblegoals LeendertvanderTorre...374 Logicaldeductionusingthelocalcomputationframework NicWilsonandJ'eromeMengin...386 AuthorIndex...397 OntheDynamicsofDefaultReasoning Grigoris Antoniou Gri?thUniversity,QLD4111,Australia UniversityofMacedonia,Thessaloniki,Greece ga@cit. gu. edu. au Abstract. Defaultlogicisaprominentrigorousmethodforreasoning withincompleteinformationbasedonassumptions. Itisastaticreas- ingapproach,inthesensethatitdoesn'treasonaboutchangesandtheir consequences. Ontheotherhand,itsnonmonotonicbehaviourappears whenchangestoadefaulttheoryaremade.

An introductory review of uncertainty formalisms by the volume editors begins the volume. The first main part of the book introduces some of the general problems dealt with in research. The second part is devoted to case studies; each presentation in this category has a well-delineated application problem and an analyzed solution based on an uncertainty formalism. The final part reports on developments of uncertainty formalisms and supporting technology, such as automated reasoning systems, that are vital to making these formalisms applicable. The book ends with a useful subject index. There is considerable synergy between the papers presented. The representative collection of case studies and associated techniques make the volume a particularly coherent and valuable resource. It will be indispensable reading for researchers and professionals interested in the application of uncertainty formalisms as well as for newcomers to the topic.

When you think of a map of the United States, what do you see? Now think of the Seattle that begot Jimi Hendrix. The Dallas that shaped Erykah Badu. The Holly Springs, Mississippi that compelled Ida B. Wells to activism against lynching. The Birmingham where Martin Luther King, Jr. penned his most famous missive. Now how do you see the United States? Chocolate Cities offers a new cartography of the U.S.-a "Black Map" that more accurately reflects the lived experiences and the future of Black life in America. Drawing on cultural sources such as film, music, fiction, and plays alongside traditional resources like census data, oral histories, ethnographies, and health and wealth data, the book offers a new perspective for analyzing, mapping, and understanding the ebbs and flows of the Black American experience-all in the cities, towns, neighborhoods, and communities that they create and defend. Black maps are consequentially different from our current geographical understanding of race and place in America. And as the U.S. moves toward a majority minority society, Chocolate Cities provides a broad and necessary assessment of how racial and ethnic minorities make and change America's social, economic, and political landscape.