| dc.contributor.author | Thimm, Matthias | |
| dc.date | 2017-03-01 | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2018-01-08T08:12:55Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2018-01-08T08:12:55Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2017 | |
| dc.identifier.issn | 1610-1987 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://dl.gi.de/handle/20.500.12116/11031 | |
| dc.description.abstract | An inconsistency measure is a function mapping a knowledge base to a non-negative real number, where larger values indicate the presence of more significant inconsistencies in the knowledge base. In order to assess the quality of a particular inconsistency measure, a wide range of rationality postulates has been proposed in the literature. In this paper, we survey 15 recent approaches to inconsistency measurement and provide a comparative analysis on their compliance with 18 rationality postulates. In doing so, we fill the gaps in previous partial investigations and provide new insights into the adequacy of certain measures and the significance of certain postulates. | |
| dc.publisher | Springer | |
| dc.relation.ispartof | KI - Künstliche Intelligenz: Vol. 31, No. 1 | |
| dc.relation.ispartofseries | KI - Künstliche Intelligenz | |
| dc.subject | Inconsistency measurement | |
| dc.subject | Rationality postulates | |
| dc.title | On the Compliance of Rationality Postulates for Inconsistency Measures: A More or Less Complete Picture | |
| dc.type | Text/Journal Article | |
| mci.reference.pages | 31-39 | |
| gi.identifier.doi | 10.1007/s13218-016-0451-y | |
