In Knowledge Graphs (KGs), where the schema of the data is usually defined by particular ontologies, reasoning is a necessity to perform a range of tasks, such as retrieval of information, question answering, and the derivation of new knowledge. However, information to populate KGs is often extracted (semi-) automatically from natural language resources, or by integrating datasets that follow different semantic schemas, resulting in KG inconsistency. This, however, hinders the process of reasoning. In this survey, we focus on how to perform reasoning on inconsistent KGs, by analyzing the state of the art towards three complementary directions: a) the detection of the parts of the KG that cause the inconsistency, b) the fixing of an inconsistent KG to render it consistent, and c) the inconsistency-tolerant reasoning. We discuss existing work from a range of relevant fields focusing on how, and in which cases they are related to the above directions. We also highlight persisting challenges and future directions.

Modern machine learning systems represent their computations as dataflow graphs. The increasingly complex neural network architectures crave for more powerful yet efficient programming abstractions. In this paper we propose an efficient technique for supporting recursive function definitions in dataflow-based systems such as TensorFlow. The proposed approach transforms the given recursive definitions into a static dataflow graph that is enriched with two simple yet powerful dataflow operations. Since static graphs do not change during execution, they can be easily partitioned and executed efficiently in distributed and heterogeneous environments. The proposed technique makes heavy use of the idea of tagging, which was one of the cornerstones of dataflow systems since their inception. We demonstrate that our technique is compatible with the idea of automatic differentiation, a notion that is crucial for dataflow systems that focus on deep learning applications. We describe the principles of an actual implementation of the technique in the TensorFlow framework, and present experimental results that demonstrate that the use of tagging is of paramount importance for developing efficient high-level abstractions for modern dataflow systems.

Logic Programs with Ordered Disjunction (LPODs) extend classical logic programs with the capability of expressing alternatives with decreasing degrees of preference in the heads of program rules. Despite the fact that the operational meaning of ordered disjunction is clear, there exists an important open issue regarding its semantics. In particular, there does not exist a purely model-theoretic approach for determining the most preferred models of an LPOD. At present, the selection of the most preferred models is performed using a technique that is not based exclusively on the models of the program and in certain cases produces counterintuitive results. We provide a novel, model-theoretic semantics for LPODs, which uses an additional truth value in order to identify the most preferred models of a program. We demonstrate that the proposed approach overcomes the shortcomings of the traditional semantics of LPODs. Moreover, the new approach can be used to define the semantics of a natural class of logic programs that can have both ordered and classical disjunctions in the heads of clauses. This allows programs that can express not only strict levels of preferences but also alternatives that are equally preferred. This work is under consideration for acceptance in TPLP.

Logical formalisms provide a natural and concise means for specifying and reasoning about preferences. In this paper, we propose lexicographic logic, an extension of classical propositional logic that can express a variety of preferences, most notably lexicographic ones. The proposed logic supports a simple new connective whose semantics can be defined in terms of finite lists of truth values. We demonstrate that, despite the well-known theoretical limitations that pose barriers to the quantitative representation of lexicographic preferences, there exists a subset of the rational numbers over which the proposed new connective can be naturally defined. Lexicographic logic can be used to define in a simple way some well-known preferential operators, like "$A$ and if possible $B$", and "$A$ or failing that $B$". Moreover, many other hierarchical preferential operators can be defined using a systematic approach. We argue that the new logic is an effective formalism for ranking query results according to the satisfaction level of user preferences.

Extensional higher-order logic programming has been introduced as a generalization of classical logic programming. An important characteristic of this paradigm is that it preserves all the well-known properties of traditional logic programming. In this paper we consider the semantics of negation in the context of the new paradigm. Using some recent results from non-monotonic fixed-point theory, we demonstrate that every higher-order logic program with negation has a unique minimum infinite-valued model. In this way we obtain the first purely model-theoretic semantics for negation in extensional higher-order logic programming. Using our approach, we resolve an old paradox that was introduced by W. W. Wadge in order to demonstrate the semantic difficulties of higher-order logic programming.