Consensus maximisation (MaxCon), which is widely used for robust fitting in computer vision, aims to find the largest subset of data that fits the model within some tolerance level. In this paper, we outline the connection between MaxCon problem and the abstract problem of finding the maximum upper zero of a Monotone Boolean Function (MBF) defined over the Boolean Cube. Then, we link the concept of influences (in a MBF) to the concept of outlier (in MaxCon) and show that influences of points belonging to the largest structure in data would generally be smaller under certain conditions. Based on this observation, we present an iterative algorithm to perform consensus maximisation. Results for both synthetic and real visual data experiments show that the MBF based algorithm is capable of generating a near optimal solution relatively quickly. This is particularly important where there are large number of outliers (gross or pseudo) in the observed data.

Such a scenario occurs, but not especially often. Two identical temperature sensors produce readings that are equally likely to be close to the actual value, but a difference in made, age, or position changes their reliability. Two experts hardly have the very same knowledge, experience and ability. The reliability of two databases on a certain area may depend on factors that are unknown when merging them. Merging under equal and unequal reliability are two scenarios, but a third exists: unknown reliability. Most previous work in belief merging is about the first [41, 43, 13, 22, 36, 31, 23]; some is about the second [53, 42, 12, 35]; this one is about the third. The difference between equal and unknown reliability is clear when its implications on some examples are shown.

This paper outlines connections between Monotone Boolean Functions, LP-Type problems and the Maximum Consensus Problem. The latter refers to a particular type of robust fitting characterisation, popular in Computer Vision (MaxCon). Indeed, this is our main motivation but we believe the results of the study of these connections are more widely applicable to LP-type problems (at least 'thresholded versions', as we describe), and perhaps even more widely. We illustrate, with examples from Computer Vision, how the resulting perspectives suggest new algorithms. Indeed, we focus, in the experimental part, on how the Influence (a property of Boolean Functions that takes on a special form if the function is Monotone) can guide a search for the MaxCon solution.

Merging beliefs requires the plausibility of the sources of the information to be merged. They are typically assumed equally reliable when nothing suggests otherwise. A recent line of research has spun from the idea of deriving this information from the revision process itself. In particular, the history of previous revisions and previous merging examples provide information for performing subsequent merging operations. Yet, no examples or previous revisions may be available. In spite of the apparent lack of information, something can still be inferred by a try-and-check approach: a relative reliability ordering is assumed, the sources are integrated according to it and the result is compared with the original information. The final check may contradict the original ordering, like when the result of merging implies the negation of a formula coming from a source initially assumed reliable, or it implies a formula coming from a source assumed unreliable. In such cases, the reliability ordering assumed in the first place can be excluded from consideration. Such a scenario is proved real under the classifications of source reliability and definitions of belief integration considered in this article: sources divided in two, three or multiple reliability classes; integration is mostly by maximal consistent subsets but also weighted distance is considered.

Merging operators aim at defining the beliefs/goals of a group of agents from the beliefs/goals of each member of the group. Whenever an agent of the group has preferences over the possible results of the merging process (i.e., the possible merged bases), she can try to rig the merging process by lying on her true beliefs/goals if this leads to a better merged base according to her point of view. Obviously, strategy-proof operators are highly desirable in order to guarantee equity among agents even when some of them are not sincere. In this paper, we draw the strategy-proof landscape for many merging operators from the literature, including model-based ones and formula-based ones. Both the general case and several restrictions on the merging process are considered.