Borderline vs. unknown : comparing three-valued representations of imperfect information
- Submitting institution
-
University of Bristol
- Unit of assessment
- 11 - Computer Science and Informatics
- Output identifier
- 94617093
- Type
- D - Journal article
- DOI
-
10.1016/j.ijar.2014.07.004
- Title of journal
- International Journal of Approximate Reasoning
- Article number
- -
- First page
- 1866
- Volume
- 55
- Issue
- 9
- ISSN
- 0888-613X
- Open access status
- Out of scope for open access requirements
- Month of publication
- July
- Year of publication
- 2014
- URL
-
-
- Supplementary information
-
-
- Request cross-referral to
- -
- Output has been delayed by COVID-19
- No
- COVID-19 affected output statement
- -
- Forensic science
- No
- Criminology
- No
- Interdisciplinary
- No
- Number of additional authors
-
2
- Research group(s)
-
A - Artificial Intelligence and Autonomy
- Citation count
- 31
- Proposed double-weighted
- No
- Reserve for an output with double weighting
- No
- Additional information
- This well received paper is an international collaboration with colleagues in France and Italy partly funded EP/H024786/1. It clarifies a long-standing confusion about the practice of using three-valued logic to model uncertainty and vagueness. Truth-functional three-valued logic is often used to represent uncertainty about the state-of-the-world, interpreting the third truth-value as `unknown'. We show that truth-functionality is not appropriate in this case. However, when modelling vagueness where the third truth-value means `borderline', a truth-functional calculus can be used. By exposing the inherent assumptions underlying three-valued logic this work helps practitioners to select more appropriate formalisms to capture vagueness and uncertainty.
- Author contribution statement
- -
- Non-English
- No
- English abstract
- -