Paraconsistency and word puzzles

DOI10.1017/S1471068416000326zbMATH Open1379.68293arXiv1608.01338OpenAlexW2963895714MaRDI QIDQ4593052FDOQ4593052

Authors: Tiantian Gao, Paul Fodor, Michael Kifer 

Publication date: 9 November 2017

Published in: Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (Search for Journal in Brave)

Abstract: 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).

Full work available at URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/1608.01338

Recommendations

• A logic for reasoning with inconsistency
• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 2070200
• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 1269574
• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 4128792
• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 4026795

zbMATH Keywords

paraconsistencycontrolled natural languageword puzzlesannotated predicate calculus

Mathematics Subject Classification ID

Paraconsistent logics (03B53) Logic of natural languages (03B65) Logic in artificial intelligence (68T27) Natural language processing (68T50)

Cites Work

• Title not available (Why is that?)
• Title not available (Why is that?)
• Paraconsistent logic programming
• On the theory of inconsistent formal systems
• Title not available (Why is that?)
• Title not available (Why is that?)
• A logic for reasoning with inconsistency
• Handbook of paraconsistency
• Title not available (Why is that?)
• The jobs puzzle: taking on the challenge via controlled natural language processing

Cited In (2)

• On recent applications of paraconsistent logic: an exploratory literature review
• A general framework for preferences in answer set programming

Uses Software

• Smodels
• Potassco
• asprin

This page was built for publication: Paraconsistency and word puzzles

Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q4593052)