The Hardness of Revising Defeasible Preferences

View/ Open
File version
Accepted Manuscript (AM)
Author(s)
Governatori, G
Olivieri, F
Scannapieco, S
Cristani, M
Griffith University Author(s)
Year published
2014
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
Non-monotonic reasoning typically deals with three kinds of knowledge. Facts are meant to describe immutable statements of the environment. Rules define relationships among elements. Lastly, an ordering among the rules, in the form of a superiority relation, establishes the relative strength of rules. To revise a non-monotonic theory, we can change either one of these three elements. We prove that the problem of revising a non-monotonic theory by only changing the superiority relation is a NP-complete problem.Non-monotonic reasoning typically deals with three kinds of knowledge. Facts are meant to describe immutable statements of the environment. Rules define relationships among elements. Lastly, an ordering among the rules, in the form of a superiority relation, establishes the relative strength of rules. To revise a non-monotonic theory, we can change either one of these three elements. We prove that the problem of revising a non-monotonic theory by only changing the superiority relation is a NP-complete problem.
View less >
View less >
Conference Title
Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)
Volume
8620 LNCS
Copyright Statement
© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014g. This is the author-manuscript version of this paper. Reproduced in accordance with the copyright policy of the publisher.The original publication is available at www.springerlink.com
Subject
Analysis of Algorithms and Complexity