4 Search Results for "Condotta, Jean-François"

Document
Extended Abstract
DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.TIME.2023.16
A Decomposition Framework for Inconsistency Handling in Qualitative Spatial and Temporal Reasoning (Extended Abstract)

Authors: Yakoub Salhi and Michael Sioutis

Published in: LIPIcs, Volume 278, 30th International Symposium on Temporal Representation and Reasoning (TIME 2023)

Abstract
Dealing with inconsistency is a central problem in AI, due to the fact that inconsistency can arise for many reasons in real-world applications, such as context dependency, multi-source information, vagueness, noisy data, etc. Among the approaches that are involved in inconsistency handling, we can mention argumentation, non-monotonic reasoning, and paraconsistency, e.g., see [Philippe Besnard and Anthony Hunter, 2008; Gerhard Brewka et al., 1997; Koji Tanaka et al., 2013]. In the work of [Yakoub Salhi and Michael Sioutis, 2023], we are interested in dealing with inconsistency in the context of Qualitative Spatio-Temporal Reasoning (QSTR) [Ligozat, 2013]. QSTR is an AI framework that aims to mimic, natural, human-like representation and reasoning regarding space and time. This framework is applied to a variety of domains, such as qualitative case-based reasoning and learning [Thiago Pedro Donadon Homem et al., 2020] and visual sensemaking [Jakob Suchan et al., 2021]; the interested reader is referred to [Michael Sioutis and Diedrich Wolter, 2021] for a recent survey. Motivation. In [Yakoub Salhi and Michael Sioutis, 2023], we study the decomposition of an inconsistent constraint network into consistent subnetworks under, possible, mandatory constraints. To illustrate the interest of such a decomposition, we provide a simple example described in Figure 1. The QCN depicted in the top part of the figure corresponds to a description of an inconsistent plan. Further, we assume that the constraint Task A {before} Task B is mandatory. To handle inconsistency, this plan can be transformed into a decomposition of two consistent plans, depicted in the bottom part of the figure; this decomposition can be used, e.g., to capture the fact that Task C must be performed twice. More generally, network decomposition can be involved in inconsistency handling in several ways: it can be used to identify potential contexts that explain the presence of inconsistent information; it can also be used to restore consistency through a compromise between the components of a decomposition, e.g., by using belief merging [Jean-François Condotta et al., 2010]; in addition, QCN decomposition can be used as the basis for defining inconsistency measures. Contributions. We summarize the contributions of [Yakoub Salhi and Michael Sioutis, 2023] as follows. First, we propose a theoretical study of a problem that consists in decomposing an inconsistent QCN into a bounded number of consistent QCNs that may satisfy a specified part in the original QCN; intuitively, the required common part corresponds to the constraints that are considered necessary, if any. To this end, we provide upper bounds for the minimum number of components in a decomposition as well as computational complexity results. Secondly, we provide two methods for solving our decomposition problem. The first method corresponds to a greedy constraint-based algorithm, a variant of which involves the use of spanning trees; the basic idea of this variant is that any acyclic constraint graph in QSTR is consistent, and such a graph can be used as a starting point for building consistent components. The second method corresponds to a SAT-based encoding; every model of this encoding is used to construct a valid decomposition. Thirdly, we consider two optimization versions of the initial decomposition problem that focus on minimizing the number of components and maximizing the similarity between components, respectively. The similarity between two QCNs is quantified by the number of common non-universal constraints; the interest in maximizing the similarity lies mainly in the fact that it reduces the number of constraints that allow each component to be distinguished from the rest. Of course, our previous methods are adapted to tackle these optimization versions, too. Additionally, we introduce two inconsistency measures based on QCN decomposition, which can be seen as counterparts of measures for propositional KBs introduced in [Matthias Thimm, 2016; Meriem Ammoura et al., 2017], and show that they satisfy several desired properties in the literature. Finally, we provide implementations of our methods for computing decompositions and experimentally evaluate them using different metrics.
Cite as

Yakoub Salhi and Michael Sioutis. A Decomposition Framework for Inconsistency Handling in Qualitative Spatial and Temporal Reasoning (Extended Abstract). In 30th International Symposium on Temporal Representation and Reasoning (TIME 2023). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 278, pp. 16:1-16:3, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2023)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{salhi_et_al:LIPIcs.TIME.2023.16,
  author =	{Salhi, Yakoub and Sioutis, Michael},
  title =	{{A Decomposition Framework for Inconsistency Handling in Qualitative Spatial and Temporal Reasoning}},
  booktitle =	{30th International Symposium on Temporal Representation and Reasoning (TIME 2023)},
  pages =	{16:1--16:3},
  series =	{Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-95977-298-3},
  ISSN =	{1868-8969},
  year =	{2023},
  volume =	{278},
  editor =	{Artikis, Alexander and Bruse, Florian and Hunsberger, Luke},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops-dev.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.TIME.2023.16},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-191062},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.TIME.2023.16},
  annote =	{Keywords: Spatial and Temporal Reasoning, Qualitative Constraints, Inconsistency Handling, Decomposition, Inconsistency Measures}
}
Document
DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.TIME.2021.16
A One-Pass Tree-Shaped Tableau for Defeasible LTL

Authors: Anasse Chafik, Fahima Cheikh-Alili, Jean-François Condotta, and Ivan Varzinczak

Published in: LIPIcs, Volume 206, 28th International Symposium on Temporal Representation and Reasoning (TIME 2021)

Abstract
Defeasible Linear Temporal Logic is a defeasible temporal formalism for representing and verifying exception-tolerant systems. It is based on Linear Temporal Logic (LTL) and builds on the preferential approach of Kraus et al. for non-monotonic reasoning, which allows us to formalize and reason with exceptions. In this paper, we tackle the satisfiability checking problem for defeasible LTL. One of the methods for satisfiability checking in LTL is the one-pass tree shaped analytic tableau proposed by Reynolds. We adapt his tableau to defeasible LTL by integrating the preferential semantics to the method. The novelty of this work is in showing how the preferential semantics works in a tableau method for defeasible linear temporal logic. We introduce a sound and complete tableau method for a fragment that can serve as the basis for further exploring tableau methods for this logic.
Cite as

Anasse Chafik, Fahima Cheikh-Alili, Jean-François Condotta, and Ivan Varzinczak. A One-Pass Tree-Shaped Tableau for Defeasible LTL. In 28th International Symposium on Temporal Representation and Reasoning (TIME 2021). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 206, pp. 16:1-16:18, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2021)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{chafik_et_al:LIPIcs.TIME.2021.16,
  author =	{Chafik, Anasse and Cheikh-Alili, Fahima and Condotta, Jean-Fran\c{c}ois and Varzinczak, Ivan},
  title =	{{A One-Pass Tree-Shaped Tableau for Defeasible LTL}},
  booktitle =	{28th International Symposium on Temporal Representation and Reasoning (TIME 2021)},
  pages =	{16:1--16:18},
  series =	{Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-95977-206-8},
  ISSN =	{1868-8969},
  year =	{2021},
  volume =	{206},
  editor =	{Combi, Carlo and Eder, Johann and Reynolds, Mark},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops-dev.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.TIME.2021.16},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-147924},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.TIME.2021.16},
  annote =	{Keywords: Temporal logic, Non-monotonic reasoning, Tableau Calculi}
}
Document
DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.TIME.2020.19
On the Decidability of a Fragment of preferential LTL

Authors: Anasse Chafik, Fahima Cheikh-Alili, Jean-François Condotta, and Ivan Varzinczak

Published in: LIPIcs, Volume 178, 27th International Symposium on Temporal Representation and Reasoning (TIME 2020)

Abstract
Linear Temporal Logic (LTL) has found extensive applications in Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence, notably as a formal framework for representing and verifying computer systems that vary over time. Non-monotonic reasoning, on the other hand, allows us to formalize and reason with exceptions and the dynamics of information. The goal of this paper is therefore to enrich temporal formalisms with non-monotonic reasoning features. We do so by investigating a preferential semantics for defeasible LTL along the lines of that extensively studied by Kraus et al. in the propositional case and recently extended to modal and description logics. The main contribution of the paper is a decidability result for a meaningful fragment of preferential LTL that can serve as the basis for further exploration of defeasibility in temporal formalisms.
Cite as

Anasse Chafik, Fahima Cheikh-Alili, Jean-François Condotta, and Ivan Varzinczak. On the Decidability of a Fragment of preferential LTL. In 27th International Symposium on Temporal Representation and Reasoning (TIME 2020). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 178, pp. 19:1-19:19, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2020)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{chafik_et_al:LIPIcs.TIME.2020.19,
  author =	{Chafik, Anasse and Cheikh-Alili, Fahima and Condotta, Jean-Fran\c{c}ois and Varzinczak, Ivan},
  title =	{{On the Decidability of a Fragment of preferential LTL}},
  booktitle =	{27th International Symposium on Temporal Representation and Reasoning (TIME 2020)},
  pages =	{19:1--19:19},
  series =	{Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-95977-167-2},
  ISSN =	{1868-8969},
  year =	{2020},
  volume =	{178},
  editor =	{Mu\~{n}oz-Velasco, Emilio and Ozaki, Ana and Theobald, Martin},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops-dev.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.TIME.2020.19},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-129871},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.TIME.2020.19},
  annote =	{Keywords: Knowledge Representation, non-monotonic reasoning, temporal logic}
}
Document
DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.TIME.2017.19
Collective Singleton-Based Consistency for Qualitative Constraint Networks

Authors: Michael Sioutis, Anastasia Paparrizou, and Jean-François Condotta

Published in: LIPIcs, Volume 90, 24th International Symposium on Temporal Representation and Reasoning (TIME 2017)

Abstract
Partial singleton closure under weak composition, or partial singleton (weak) path-consistency for short, is essential for approximating satisfiability of qualitative constraints networks. Briefly put, partial singleton path-consistency ensures that each base relation of each of the constraints of a qualitative constraint network can define a singleton relation in the corresponding partial closure of that network under weak composition, or in its corresponding partially (weak) path-consistent subnetwork for short. In particular, partial singleton path-consistency has been shown to play a crucial role in tackling the minimal labeling problem of a qualitative constraint network, which is the problem of finding the strongest implied constraints of that network. In this paper, we propose a stronger local consistency that couples partial singleton path-consistency with the idea of collectively deleting certain unfeasible base relations by exploiting singleton checks. We then propose an efficient algorithm for enforcing this consistency that, given a qualitative constraint network, performs fewer constraint checks than the respective algorithm for enforcing partial singleton path-consistency in that network. We formally prove certain properties of our new local consistency, and motivate its usefulness through demonstrative examples and a preliminary experimental evaluation with qualitative constraint networks of Interval Algebra.
Cite as

Michael Sioutis, Anastasia Paparrizou, and Jean-François Condotta. Collective Singleton-Based Consistency for Qualitative Constraint Networks. In 24th International Symposium on Temporal Representation and Reasoning (TIME 2017). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 90, pp. 19:1-19:17, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2017)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{sioutis_et_al:LIPIcs.TIME.2017.19,
  author =	{Sioutis, Michael and Paparrizou, Anastasia and Condotta, Jean-Fran\c{c}ois},
  title =	{{Collective Singleton-Based Consistency for Qualitative Constraint Networks}},
  booktitle =	{24th International Symposium on Temporal Representation and Reasoning (TIME 2017)},
  pages =	{19:1--19:17},
  series =	{Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-95977-052-1},
  ISSN =	{1868-8969},
  year =	{2017},
  volume =	{90},
  editor =	{Schewe, Sven and Schneider, Thomas and Wijsen, Jef},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops-dev.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.TIME.2017.19},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-79237},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.TIME.2017.19},
  annote =	{Keywords: Qualitative constraint network, qualitative spatial and temporal reasoning, partial singleton path-consistency, local consistency, minimal labeling pr}
}
  • Refine by Author
  • 3 Condotta, Jean-François
  • 2 Chafik, Anasse
  • 2 Cheikh-Alili, Fahima
  • 2 Sioutis, Michael
  • 2 Varzinczak, Ivan
  • Show More...

  • Refine by Classification
  • 2 Theory of computation → Modal and temporal logics
  • 1 Computing methodologies → Spatial and physical reasoning
  • 1 Computing methodologies → Temporal reasoning
  • 1 Theory of computation → Constraint and logic programming

  • Refine by Keyword
  • 1 Decomposition
  • 1 Inconsistency Handling
  • 1 Inconsistency Measures
  • 1 Knowledge Representation
  • 1 Non-monotonic reasoning
  • Show More...

  • Refine by Type
  • 4 document

  • Refine by Publication Year
  • 1 2017
  • 1 2020
  • 1 2021
  • 1 2023

Questions / Remarks / Feedback
X

Feedback for Dagstuhl Publishing


Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail
© 2023-2024 Schloss Dagstuhl – LZI GmbH Imprint Privacy Contact