Abstract
Distances between possible worlds play an important role in logic-based knowledge representation (especially in belief change, reasoning about action, belief merging and similarity-based reasoning). We show here how they can be used for representing in a compact and intuitive way the preference profile of an agent, following the principle that given a goal G, then the closer a world w to a model of G, the better w. We give an integrated logical framework for preference representation which handles weighted goals and distances to goals in a uniform way. Then we argue that the widely used Hamming distance (which merely counts the number of propositional symbols assigned a different value by two worlds) is generally too rudimentary and too syntax-sensitive to be suitable in real applications; therefore, we propose a new family of distances, based on Choquet integrals, in which the Hamming distance has exactly a position very similar to that of the arithmetic mean in the class of Choquet integrals for multi-criteria decision making.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
O. Bailleux, P. Marquis. DISTANCE-SAT: complexity and algorithms. Proceedings of AAAI’99, pages 642–647, 1999.
S. Benferhat, D. Dubois, S. Kaci and H. Prade. Encoding information fusion in possibilistic logic: a general framework for rational syntactic merging. Proceedings of ECAI’2000, 3–7.
I Blochand J. Lang. Towards mathematical morphologics. Proceedings of IPMU’2000.
B. Benhamou, L. Sais and P. Siegel. Two proof procedures for a cardinality-based language in propositional calculus. Proceedings of STACS’94.
C. Cayrol. Un mod`ele logique pour le raisonnement révisable (in French). Revue d’Intelligence Artificielle 6, 255–284, Hermés, 1992.
M. Dalal. Investigations into a theory of knowledge base revision: preliminary report. Proceedings of AAAI’88, p. 475–479, 1988.
D. Dubois, J. Lang and H. Prade. Possibilistic logic. Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming (D.M. Gabbay, C.J. Hogger, J.A. Robinson, (eds.), Vol. 3, 439–513, Oxford University Press. 1994.
F. Dupin de Saint-Cyr, J. Lang and T. Schiex., Penalty logic and its link with Dempster-Shafer theory, UAI’94, 1994.
K. D. Forbus. Introducing actions into qualitative simulation. Proc. IJCAI’89, 1273–1278.
S. Konieczny, R. Pino-Pérez, On the logic of merging. Proceedings of KR’98, 488–498, 1998.
S. Konieczny, R. Pino-Pérez. Merging with integrity constraints. Proceedings of EC-SQARU’99, 233–244, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 1638, Springer Verlag, 1999.
C. Lafage. Représentation logique de préférences. Application á la décision de groupe. Thése de l’Unievsrté Paul Sabatier, Toulouse, 2001.
C. Lafage, J. Lang. Logical representation of preferences for group decision making. Proceedings of KR’2000, 457–468, 2000.
J. Lang. Conditional desires and utilities-an alternative approach to qualitative decision theory. Proceedings of ECAI’96, 318–322, 1996.
P. Liberatore and M. Schaerf. Arbitration: a commutative operator for belief revision. Proceedings of the World Conference on the Fundamentals of Artificial Research, 1995, 217–228.
J. Lin. Integration of weighted knowledge bases. Artificial Intelligence 83 (1996), 363–378.
P. Marquis and N. Porquet. Decomposing propositional knowledge bases through topics (extended abstract). Personal communication.
T. Murofushi and M. Sugeno. An interpretation of fuzzy measures and the Choquet integral as an integral with respect to a fuzzy measure, Fuzzy Sets and Systems 29 (1989), 201–227.
D. Schmeidler. Integral representation without additivity. Proc. Americ. Math. Soc. 97 (1986), 255–261.
S.-W. Tan and J. Pearl, Specification and evaluation of preferences for planning under uncertainty, Proc. KR’94.
L. van der Torre and E. Weydert. Parameters for utilitarian desires in a qualitative decision theory, Applied Intelligence, 2001, to appear.
R.R. Yager, On ordered weighted averaging aggregation operators in multi-criteria decision making. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics 18, p. 183–190, 1988.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2001 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Lafage, C., Lang, J. (2001). Propositional Distances and Preference Representation. In: Benferhat, S., Besnard, P. (eds) Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty. ECSQARU 2001. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 2143. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44652-4_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44652-4_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-42464-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-44652-1
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive