doi:10.48130/ker-0026-0006

[1]

Abiteboul S, Hull R, Vianu V. 1995. Foundations of databases. Boston, USA: Addison-Wesley. http://webdam.inria.fr/Alice

[2]

ten Cate B, Fontaine G, Kolaitis PG. 2012. On the data complexity of consistent query answering. ICDT’12: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Database Theory, Berlin, Germany, 26–29 March 2012. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery. pp. 22–33 doi: 10.1145/2274576.2274580

[3]

Barceló P, Fontaine G. 2017. On the data complexity of consistent query answering over graph databases. Journal of Computer and System Sciences 88:164−194

doi: 10.1016/j.jcss.2017.03.015

[4]

Wijsen J. 2003. Condensed representation of database repairs for consistent query answering. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Database Theory, ICDT'03. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag. pp. 378–393 doi: 10.5555/645505.656435

[5]

Lopatenko A, Bertossi LE. 2007. Complexity of consistent query answering in databases under cardinality-based and incremental repair semantics. ICDT 2007: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Database Theory, Barcelona, Spain, 10–12 January 2007, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, eds. Schwentick T, Suciu D. Berlin, Vol. 4353. Heidelberg: Springer. pp. 179–193 doi: 10.1007/11965893_13

[6]

Dung PM. 1995. On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Artificial Intelligence 77(2):321−357

doi: 10.1016/0004-3702(94)00041-X

[7]

Nielsen SH, Parsons S. 2006. A generalization of Dung’s abstract framework for argumentation: arguing with sets of attacking arguments. Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems, Third International Workshop, ArgMAS 2006, Hakodate, Japan, 8 May 2006, Revised Selected and Invited Papers, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, eds. Maudet N, Parsons S, Rahwan I. Vol. 4766. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. pp. 54–73 doi: 10.1007/978-3-540-75526-5_4

[8]

Arioua A, Croitoru M. 2016. Dialectical characterization of consistent query explanation with existential rules. Proceedings of the Twenty-Ninth International Florida Artificial Intelligence Research Society Conference, FLAIRS 2016, Key Largo, Florida, USA, 16–18 May 2016, eds. Markov Z, Russell I. Washington D.C., USA: AAAI Press. pp. 621–625. www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/FLAIRS/FLAIRS16/paper/view/12800

[9]

Arioua A, Croitoru M, Vesic S. 2017. Logic-based argumentation with existential rules. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning 90:76−106

doi: 10.1016/j.ijar.2017.07.004

[10]

Arioua A, Tamani N, Croitoru M. 2015. Query answering explanation in inconsistent datalog +/- knowledge bases. Database and Expert Systems Applications - 26th International Conference, DEXA 2015, Valencia, Spain, 1–4 September 2015, Proceedings, Part I. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, eds. Chen Q, Hameurlain A, Toumani F, Wagner RR, Decker H. Vol. 9261. Cham: Springer. pp. 203–219 doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-22849-5_15

[11]

Young AP, Modgil S, Rodrigues O. 2016. Prioritised default logic as argumentation with partial order default priorities. arXiv:1609.05224

[12]

Yun B, Vesic S, Croitoru M. 2020. Sets of attacking arguments for inconsistent datalog knowledge bases. Computational Models of Argument - Proceedings of COMMA 2020, Perugia, Italy, 4–11 September 2020. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, eds. Prakken H, Bistarelli S, Santini F, Taticchi C. Vol. 326. Amsterdam, NL: IOS Press. pp. 419–430 doi: 10.3233/FAIA200526

[13]

Bienvenu M, Bourgaux C. 2020. Querying and repairing inconsistent prioritized knowledge bases: complexity analysis and links with abstract argumentation. Proceedings of the 17^th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, KR 2020, Rhodes, Greece, 12–18 September 2020, eds. Calvanese D, Erdem E, Thielscher M. California: IJCAI. pp. 141–151 doi: 10.24963/KR.2020/15

[14]

Arieli O, Borg A, Heyninck J. 2019. A review of the relations between logical argumentation and reasoning with maximal consistency. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 87(3):187−226

doi: 10.1007/s10472-019-09629-7

[15]

Afrati FN, Kolaitis PG. 2009. Repair checking in inconsistent databases: algorithms and complexity. Database Theory - ICDT 2009, 12th International Conference, St. Petersburg, Russia, 23–25 March 2009, Proceedings. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, ed. Fagin R. Vol. 361. New York, NY, USA: ACM. pp. 31–41 doi: 10.1145/1514894.1514899

[16]

Arenas M, Bertossi LE, Chomicki J. 2001. Scalar aggregation in FD-inconsistent databases. Database Theory - ICDT 2001, 8th International Conference, London, UK, 4–6 January 2001, Proceedings, Vol. 1973 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, eds. Van den Bussche J, Vianu V. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. pp. 39–53 doi: 10.1007/3-540-44503-X_3

[17]

Chomicki J, Marcinkowski J. 2005. Minimal-change integrity maintenance using tuple deletions. Information and Computation 197(1):90–121

[18]

Hannula M, Wijsen J. 2022. A dichotomy in consistent query answering for primary keys and unary foreign keys. PODS ’22: International Conference on Management of Data, Philadelphia, PA, USA, 12–17 June 2022, eds. Libkin L, Barceló New York, NY, USA: ACM. pp. 437–449 doi: 10.1145/3517804.3524157

[19]

Livshits E, Kimelfeld B, Roy S. 2020. Computing optimal repairs for functional dependencies. ACM Transactions on Database Systems 45(1):1–46

[20]

Staworko S, Chomicki J. 2010. Consistent query answers in the presence of universal constraints. Information Systems 35(1):1−22

doi: 10.1016/J.IS.2009.03.004

[21]

Bertossi L. 2006. Consistent query answering in databases. SIGMOD Record 35:68−76

doi: 10.1145/1147376.1147391

[22]

Bertossi LE. 2019. Database repairs and consistent query answering: origins and further developments. Proceedings of the 38th ACM SIGMOD-SIGACT-SIGAI Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, PODS 2019, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 30 June–5 July 2019, eds. Suciu D, Skritek S, Koch C. New York, NY, USA: ACM. pp. 48–58 doi: 10.1145/3294052.3322190

[23]

Kimelfeld B, Livshits E, Peterfreund L. 2017. Detecting ambiguity in prioritized database repairing. 20th International Conference on Database Theory (ICDT 2017), Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), eds. Benedikt M, Orsi G. Vol. 68. Dagstuhl, Germany: Schloss Dagstuhl–Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik. pp. 17:1–17:20 doi: 10.4230/LIPIcs.ICDT.2017.17

[24]

Kimelfeld B, Livshits E, Peterfreund L. 2020. Counting and enumerating preferred database repairs. Theoretical Computer Science 837:115−157

doi: 10.1016/J.TCS.2020.05.016

[25]

Staworko S, Chomicki J, Marcinkowski J. 2012. Prioritized repairing and consistent query answering in relational databases. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 64(2-3):209−246

doi: 10.1007/S10472-012-9288-8

[26]

Bienvenu M, Bourgaux C. 2023. Inconsistency handling in prioritized databases with universal constraints: complexity analysis and links with active integrity constraints. Proceedings of the 20^th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, Rhodes, Greece. 2–8 September 2023. California: IJCAI Organization. pp. 97–106 doi: 10.24963/kr.2023/10

[27]

Väänänen J. 2007. Dependence logic. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. https://home.hvl.no/prosjekter/easllc2012/docs/vaananen/dependence_logic_short_version.pdf

[28]

Hannula M, Hella L. 2022. Complexity thresholds in inclusion logic. Information and Computation 287:104759

doi: 10.1016/J.IC.2021.104759

[29]

Mahmood Y. 2022. Parameterized aspects of team-based formalisms and logical inference. Thesis. Institutional Repository of Leibniz Universität, Hannover, Germany.

[30]

Arioua A, Tamani N, Croitoru M, Buche P. 2014. Query failure explanation in inconsistent knowledge bases using argumentation. Computational Models of Argument - Proceedings of COMMA 2014, Atholl Palace Hotel, Scottish Highlands, UK, 9–12 September 2014. Vol. 266 of Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, eds. Parsons S, Oren N, Reed C, Cerutti F. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: IOS Press. pp. 101–108 doi: 10.3233/978-1-61499-436-7-101

[31]

Croitoru M, Thomopoulos R, Vesic S. 2015. Introducing preference-based argumentation to inconsistent ontological knowledge bases. PRIMA 2015: Principles and Practice of Multi-Agent Systems - 18th International Conference, Bertinoro, Italy, 26–30 October 2015, Proceedings. Vol. 9387 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, eds. Chen Q, Torroni P, Villata S, Yung-jen Hsu J, Omicini A. Cham: Springer. pp. 594–602 doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-25524-8_42

[32]

Croitoru M, Vesic S. 2013. What can argumentation do for inconsistent ontology query answering? Scalable Uncertainty Management - 7th International Conference, SUM 2013, Proceedings. Washington, DC, USA, 16–18 September 2013. Vol. 8078 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, eds. Liu W, Subrahmanian VS, Wijsen J. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. pp. 15–29 doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-40381-1_2

[33]

Ho L, Arch-int S, Acar E, Schlobach S, Arch-int N. 2022. An argumentative approach for handling inconsistency in prioritized datalog± ontologies. AI Communications 35:243−267

doi: 10.3233/AIC-220087

[34]

König M, Rapberger A, Ulbricht M. 2022. Just a matter of perspective. In Computational models of argument, eds. Toni F, Polberg S, Booth R, Caminada M, Kido H. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: IOS Press. pp. 212–223 doi: 10.3233/FAIA220154

[35]

Bondarenko A, Dung PM, Kowalski RA, Toni F. 1997. An abstract, argumentation-theoretic approach to default reasoning. Artificial intelligence 93(1−2):63−101

doi: 10.1016/S0004-3702(97)00015-5

[36]

Dvořák W, Woltran S. 2020. Complexity of abstract argumentation under a claim-centric view. Artificial Intelligence 285:103290

doi: 10.1016/j.artint.2020.103290

[37]

Mahmood Y, Hecher M, Ngomo A-CN. 2025. Dung’s argumentation framework: unveiling the expressive power with inconsistent databases. AAAI-25, Sponsored by the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence, Philadelphia, PA, USA, 25 February–4 March 2025, eds. Walsh T, Shah J, Kolter Z. Washington, DC, USA: AAAI Press. pp. 15058–15066 doi: 10.1609/AAAI.V39I14.33651

[38]

Mahmood Y, Virtema J, Barlag T, Ngomo A-CN. 2024. Computing repairs under functional and inclusion dependencies via argumentation. International Symposium on Foundations of Information and Knowledge Systems, eds. Meier A, Ortiz M. Cham: Springer. pp. 23–42 doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-56940-1_2

[39]

Arming S, Pichler R, Sallinger E. 2016. Complexity of repair checking and consistent query answering. 19th International Conference on Database Theory (ICDT 2016). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs). Vol. 48. Schloss Dagstuhl: Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik. pp. 21:1–21:18 doi: 10.4230/LIPIcs.ICDT.2016.21

[40]

Dvorák W, Dunne PE. 2017. Computational problems in formal argumentation and their complexity. FLAP 4(8):21:1−21:18

[41]

Coste-Marquis S, Devred C, Marquis P. 2005. Symmetric argumentation frameworks. Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty, 8th European Conference, ECSQARU 2005, Barcelona, Spain, 6–8 July 2005, Proceedings. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, ed. Godo L. Vol. 3571. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. pp. 317–328 doi: 10.1007/11518655_28

[42]

Amgoud L, Cayrol C, Lagasquie-Schiex MC, Livet P. 2008. On bipolarity in argumentation frameworks. International Journal of Intelligent Systems 23(10):1062−1093

doi: 10.1002/INT.20307

[43]

Nouioua F, Risch V. 2011. Argumentation frameworks with necessities. Scalable Uncertainty Management - 5^th International Conference, Proceedings, SUM 2011, Dayton, OH, USA, 10–13 October 2011. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, eds. Benferhat S, Grant J. Vol. 6929. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. pp. 163–176 doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-23963-2_14

[44]

Dimopoulos Y, Dvorák W, König M, Rapberger A, Ulbricht M, et al. 2023. Sets attacking sets in abstract argumentation. 21^st International Workshop on Nonmonotonic Reasoning, 2–4 September 2023, Rhodes, Greece. Bonn, Germany: CEUR-WS.org. pp. 22–31 doi: 10.34726/5386

[45]

Fagin R, Kimelfeld B, Kolaitis PG. 2015. Dichotomies in the complexity of preferred repairs. Proceedings of the 34^th ACM Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, PODS 2015, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, 31 May–4 June 2015. New York, NY, USA: ACM. pp. 3–15 doi: 10.1145/2745754.2745762

[46]

Bienvenu M, Bourgaux C, Goasdoué F. 2019. Computing and explaining query answers over inconsistent dl-lite knowledge bases. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 64:563−644

doi: 10.1613/jair.1.11395