n this paper we compare the expressive power of elementary representation formats for vague, incomplete or conflicting information. These include Boolean valuation pairs introduced by Lawry and González-Rodríguez, orthopairs of sets of variables, Boolean possibility and necessity measures, three-valued valuations, supervaluations. We make explicit their connections with strong Kleene logic and with Belnap logic of conflicting information. The formal similarities between 3-valued approaches to vagueness and formalisms that handle incomplete information often lead to a confusion between degrees of truth and degrees of uncertainty. Yet there are important differences that appear at the interpretive level: while truth-functional logics of vagueness are accepted by a part of the scientific community (even if questioned by supervaluationists), the truth-functionality assumption of three-valued calculi for handling incomplete information looks questionable, compared to the non-truth-functional approaches based on Boolean possibility–necessity pairs. This paper aims to clarify the similarities and differences between the two situations. We also study to what extent operations for comparing and merging information items in the form of orthopairs can be expressed by means of operations on valuation pairs, three-valued valuations and underlying possibility distributions.

Ciucci, D., Dubois, D., Lawry, J. (2014). Borderline vs. unknown comparing three-valued representations of imperfect information. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF APPROXIMATE REASONING, 55(9), 1866-1889 [10.1016/j.ijar.2014.07.004].

Borderline vs. unknown comparing three-valued representations of imperfect information

CIUCCI, DAVIDE ELIO;
2014

Abstract

n this paper we compare the expressive power of elementary representation formats for vague, incomplete or conflicting information. These include Boolean valuation pairs introduced by Lawry and González-Rodríguez, orthopairs of sets of variables, Boolean possibility and necessity measures, three-valued valuations, supervaluations. We make explicit their connections with strong Kleene logic and with Belnap logic of conflicting information. The formal similarities between 3-valued approaches to vagueness and formalisms that handle incomplete information often lead to a confusion between degrees of truth and degrees of uncertainty. Yet there are important differences that appear at the interpretive level: while truth-functional logics of vagueness are accepted by a part of the scientific community (even if questioned by supervaluationists), the truth-functionality assumption of three-valued calculi for handling incomplete information looks questionable, compared to the non-truth-functional approaches based on Boolean possibility–necessity pairs. This paper aims to clarify the similarities and differences between the two situations. We also study to what extent operations for comparing and merging information items in the form of orthopairs can be expressed by means of operations on valuation pairs, three-valued valuations and underlying possibility distributions.
Articolo in rivista - Articolo scientifico
Kleene logic; Partial models; Orthopairs; Vagueness; Incomplete information; Belnap logic; Supervaluations
English
2014
55
9
1866
1889
open
Ciucci, D., Dubois, D., Lawry, J. (2014). Borderline vs. unknown comparing three-valued representations of imperfect information. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF APPROXIMATE REASONING, 55(9), 1866-1889 [10.1016/j.ijar.2014.07.004].
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
ortho-IJAR-sito.pdf

accesso aperto

Dimensione 565.87 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
565.87 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/10281/53257
Citazioni
  • Scopus 56
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 47
Social impact