@incollection {Amo2002, title = {A Logical Framework for Integrating Inconsistent Information in Multiple Databases}, booktitle = {Foundations of Information and Knowledge Systems}, series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, volume = {2284}, year = {2002}, pages = {67-84}, publisher = {Springer Berlin Heidelberg}, abstract = {

When integrating data coming from multiple different sources we are faced with the possibility of inconsistency in databases. In this paper, we use one of the paraconsistent logics introduced in [9,7] (LFI1) as a logical framework to model possibly inconsistent database instances obtained by integrating different sources.We propose a method based on the sound and complete tableau proof system of LFI1 to treat both the integration process and the evolution of the integrated database submitted to users updates. In order to treat the integrated database evolution, we introduce a kind of generalized database context, the evolutionary databases, which are databases having the capability of storing and manipulating inconsistent information and, at the same time, allowing integrity constraints to change in time. We argue that our approach is sufficiently general and can be applied in most circumstances where inconsistency may arise in databases.

}, isbn = {978-3-540-43220-3}, doi = {10.1007/3-540-45758-5_5}, url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45758-5_5}, author = {de Amo, Sandra and Carnielli, Walter A. and Marcos, Jo{\~a}o}, editor = {Eiter, Thomas and Schewe, Klaus-Dieter} } @conference {carnielli2001ex, title = {Ex contradictione non sequitur quodlibet}, booktitle = {Proceedings of the 2000 Advanced Reasoning Forum Conference}, year = {2001}, abstract = {

We summarize here the main arguments, basic research lines, and results on the foundations of the logics of formal inconsistency. These involve, in particular, some classes of well-known paraconsistent systems. We also present their semantical interpretations by way of possible-translations semantics and their applications to human reasoning and machine reasoning.

}, author = {Carnielli, Walter A. and Marcos, Jo{\~a}o} } @proceedings {caleiro2001non, title = {Non-truth-functional fibred semantics}, journal = {Proceedings of the International Conference on Artificial Intelligence ({IC}-{AI}{\textquoteright}2001)}, volume = {2}, year = {2001}, pages = {841{\textendash}847}, publisher = {CSREA Press}, abstract = {

Until recently, truth-functionality has been considered essential to the mechanism for combining logics known as fibring. Following the first efforts towards extending fibred semantics to logics with nontruth- functional operators, this paper aims to clarify the subject at the light of ideas borrowed from the theory of general logics as institutions and the novel notion of non-truth-functional room. Besides introducing the relevant concepts and constructions, the paper presents a detailed worked example combining classical first-order logic with the paraconsistent propositional system C1, for which a meaningful semantics is obtained. The possibility of extending this technique to build rst-order versions of further logics of formal inconsistency is also discussed.

}, author = {Caleiro, Carlos and Marcos, Jo{\~a}o}, editor = {Arabnia, Hamid R.} } @proceedings {carnielli_tableau_2001, title = {Tableau systems for logics of formal inconsistency}, journal = {Proceedings of the International Conference on Artificial Intelligence ({IC}-{AI}{\textquoteright}2001)}, year = {2001}, pages = {848-852}, publisher = {{CSREA} Press, Athens {GA}, {USA}}, abstract = {

The logics of formal inconsistency (LFI’s) are logics that allow to explicitly formalize the concepts of consistency and inconsistency by means of formulas of their language. Contradictoriness, on the other hand, can always be expressed in any logic, provided its language includes a symbol for negation. Besides being able to represent the distinction between contradiction and inconsistency, LFI’s are non-explosive logics, in the sense that a contradiction does not entail arbitrary statements, but yet are gently explosive, in the sense that, adjoining the additional requirement of consistency, then contradictoriness do cause explosion. Several logics can be seen as LFI’s, among them the great majority of paraconsistent systems developed under the Brazilian and Polish tradition. We present here tableau systems for some important LFI’s: bC, Ci and LFI1.

}, author = {Carnielli, Walter A. and Marcos, Jo{\~a}o}, editor = {Arabnia, Hamid R.} } @incollection {carnielli2001taxonomy, title = {A taxonomy of C-systems}, booktitle = {Paraconsistency. The Logical Way to the Inconsistent}, year = {2001}, pages = {1-94}, publisher = {Marcel Dekker}, address = {New York}, abstract = {

A thorough investigation of the foundations of paraconsistent logics. Relations between logical principles are formally studied, a novel notion of consistency is introduced, the logics of formal inconsistency, and the subclasses of C-systems and dC-systems are defined and studied. An enormous variety of paraconsistent logics in the literature is shown to constitute C-systems.

}, author = {Carnielli, Walter A. and Marcos, Jo{\~a}o and Loffredo D{\textquoteright}Ottaviano, Itala M.}, editor = {Carnielli, Walter A. and Coniglio, Marcelo E.} }