Man bites dog: looking for interesting inconsistencies in structured news reports

Byrne, Emma; Hunter, Anthony

doi:10.1016/s0169-023x(03)00123-x

Cited by 9 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…2 of Logical Studies. Byrne and Hunter (2004) deal with how to detect inconsistencies in structured news reports. For a logic approach to the handling of inconsistencies in software specifications, see Finkelstein et al (1992Finkelstein et al ( , 1994, as well as Nuseibeh (1997, 1998).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Language, Culture, Computation. Computing of the Humanities, Law, and Narratives

Dershowitz¹,

Nissan²

2014

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Language, Culture, Computation. Computing of the Humanities, Law, and Narratives

Dershowitz¹,

Nissan²

2014

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Such an approach relies on some preexisting and accepted terminology by the users, that is, that exercise daily is in the lexicon already such that the contradiction of it is meaningful. More broadly, contradictoriness is a rich, complex, research domain that is only recently yielding results [3,12,16,17,47].…”

Section: Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Working on the argument pipeline: Through flow issues between natural language argument, instantiated arguments, and argumentation frameworks

Wyner

Engers

Hunter

2016

Argument & Computation

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In many domains of public discourse such as arguments about public policy, there is an abundance of knowledge to store, query, and reason with. To use this knowledge, we must address two key general problems: first, the problem of the knowledge acquisition bottleneck between forms in which the knowledge is usually expressed, e.g., natural language, and forms which can be automatically processed; second, reasoning with the uncertainties and inconsistencies of the knowledge. Given such complexities, it is labour and knowledge intensive to conduct policy consultations, where participants contribute statements to the policy discourse. Yet, from such a consultation, we want to derive policy positions, where each position is a set of consistent statements, but where positions may be mutually inconsistent. To address these problems and support policymaking consultations, we consider recent automated techniques in natural language processing, instantiating arguments, and reasoning with the arguments in argumentation frameworks. We discuss application and "bridge" issues between these techniques, outlining a pipeline of technologies whereby: expressions in a controlled natural language are parsed and translated into a logic (a literals and rules knowledge base), from which we generate instantiated arguments and their relationships using a logic-based formalism (an argument knowledge base), which is then input to an implemented argumentation framework that calculates extensions of arguments (an argument extensions knowledge base), and finally, we extract consistent sets of expressions (policy positions). The paper reports progress towards reasoning with web-based, distributed, collaborative, incomplete, and inconsistent knowledge bases expressed in natural language.

show abstract

“…Besnard and Hunter (1995) and Hunter (2000b) proposed and developed quasi-classical logic, which they show to possess useful properties to reason with inconsistent knowledge. A number of interesting applications have been studied (e.g., Hunter, 2000a;Byrne and Hunter, 2004), and the logic is known to be decidable Hunter (2000b), however no implementations are known.…”

Section: Propositional Casementioning

confidence: 99%

“…An interesting observation in these works is that the presence of inconsistency need not necessarily be an indicator of error; for instance, if multiple news reports are found inconsistent with the background knowledge, then this may be 42 MARTIN HOMOLA ET AL. an indicator of interesting new developments in the domain, that have to be accommodated and processed (Byrne and Hunter, 2004). We are not aware of any direct application or case study of paraconsistent reasoning in AmI.…”

Section: Applicability Of Paraconsistent Reasoningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Resolving conflicts in knowledge for ambient intelligence

Homola

Patkos

Flouris

et al. 2015

The Knowledge Engineering Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ambient intelligence (AmI) proposes pervasive information systems composed of autonomous agents embedded within the environment who, in orchestration, complement human activity in an intelligent manner. As such, it is an interesting and challenging application area for many computer science fields and approaches. A critical issue in such application scenarios is that the agents must be able to acquire, exchange, and evaluate knowledge about the environment, its users, and their activities. Knowledge populated between the agents in such systems may be contextually dependent, ambiguous, and incomplete. Conflicts may thus naturally arise, that need to be dealt with by the agents in an autonomous way. In this survey, we relate AmI to the area of knowledge representation and reasoning (KR), where conflict resolution has been studied for a long time. We take a look at a number of KR approaches that may be applied: context modelling, multi-context systems, belief revision, ontology evolution and debugging, argumentation, preferences, and paraconsistent reasoning. Our main goal is to describe the state of the art in these fields, and to draw attention of researchers to important theoretical issues and practical challenges that still need to be resolved, in order to reuse the results from KR in AmI systems or similar complex and demanding applications.

show abstract

Man bites dog: looking for interesting inconsistencies in structured news reports

Cited by 9 publications

References 26 publications

Language, Culture, Computation. Computing of the Humanities, Law, and Narratives

Language, Culture, Computation. Computing of the Humanities, Law, and Narratives

Working on the argument pipeline: Through flow issues between natural language argument, instantiated arguments, and argumentation frameworks

Resolving conflicts in knowledge for ambient intelligence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About