An argumentation system for reasoning with conflict-minimal paraconsistent ALC

Wenzhao Qiao, Nico Roos

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review


The semantic web is an open and distributed environment in which it is hard to guarantee consistency of knowledge and information. Under the standard two-valued semantics everything is entailed if knowledge and information is inconsistent. The semantics of the paraconsistent logic LP offers a solution. However, if the available knowledge and information is consistent, the set of conclusions entailed under the three-valued semantics of the paraconsistent logic LP is smaller than the set of conclusions entailed under the two-valued semantics. Preferring conflict-minimal three-valued interpretations eliminates this difference. Preferring conflict-minimal interpretations introduces non-monotonicity. To handle the non-monotonicity, this paper proposes an assumption-based argumentation system. Assumptions needed to close branches of a semantic tableaux form the arguments. Stable extensions of the set of derived arguments correspond to conflict minimal interpretations and conclusions entailed by all conflict-minimal interpretations are supported by arguments in all stable extensions.
Original languageEnglish
JournalProceedings of the Ieee
Publication statusPublished - 30 Apr 2014


  • cs.AI

Cite this