What are the best ways to use non-monotonic reasoning for incomplete or inconsistent information?

Non-monotonic reasoning is a method that allows for the modification of conclusions based on new information, making it useful for dealing with incomplete or inconsistent information. It includes methods like default logic, autoepistemic logic, circumscription, relevance logic, probabilistic reasoning, belief revision, answer set programming (ASP), probabilistic logic, rule-based systems, hybrid approaches, semantic web technologies, use of defaults and assumptions, and knowledge graphs. These approaches can be used to handle incomplete or inconsistent information, but it's essential to choose the appropriate formalism based on the problem domain and computational complexity to ensure practical feasibility in real-world applications.

Use this form of reasoning because the world is fluid and noisy. Non-monotonic reasoning is crucial in dynamic environments where new information can alter previous understanding. It reflects real-world decision-making better than classical logic, as it allows for the adjustment of conclusions when new facts emerge.

Decision requires a process of thinking and reasoning. This process will either be a “monotonic” process or a “non-monotonic” process. The first process is called “Monotonic Reasoning”. What is the name of the other process? This is called "non-monotonic". But it must have a name. · Active thinking · Logical thinking No, not enough. The process is about getting rid of taboos and adjusting old judgments according to new information that emerges. · Analytical thinking No, this is not enough. The statement should also include the "acceptance" status after the analysis. Humanitarian? Proactive? Solution focused? Correlative? Finally I call it as: · Correlative Thinking Which requires "checking the succes balance"...

Non-monotonic thought is the absolute way of finding a solution to a problem. If thinking process is designed to reference only beliefs and not to deviate from them even when thinking, it is never possible for people to be able to reach a solution. As an example you say: '"No matter how hard I work, I cannot achieve any results. Why?" Because you never question your methods if there are any problems with this method or not. You accept them as absolutely correct. Why?  Because you are fully convinced that whatever you know is true.  Questioning it is a taboo for you. Non-monotonic reasoning becomes possible by breaking these taboos.  And breaking taboos is only possible by allowing yourself to go beyond monotonous reasoning.

The ability to handle uncertainty and change is a significant advantage. This type of reasoning supports more flexible and creative thinking, which is essential for problem-solving in complex situations. An example in Technological Innovation: An engineer working on a new smartphone design might initially exclude certain features thought to be unnecessary. As market research comes in showing consumer interest in these features, the engineer can non-monotonically adjust the design process to include them, leading to a product better suited to consumer desires. This showcases the benefit of generating creative solutions and adapting to new insights, keeping the innovation process agile and aligned with user needs.

Imagine a wildlife conservation AI that uses non-monotonic reasoning to manage park resources. Initially, it enforces strict water usage rules based on average rainfall data. However, when faced with an unexpected prolonged drought, the AI must non-monotonically revise its rules to account for the new information. The challenge here is ensuring the AI can reliably update its reasoning as conditions change, without oversimplifying complex ecological dynamics, which could lead to either water shortages or wastage. This task is complicated and time-consuming, as the AI must balance multiple factors and predictions that may be uncertain or incomplete.

To wield non-monotonic reasoning with finesse, clarity on the problem at hand is key. Yes. It’s a dance of the mind where one’s steps must be recalibrated with every new beat of information. You’re sculpting your understanding, molding rules and principles to the evolving form of knowledge. It’s an intellectual agility that respects the fluid nature of truth, where assertions are as malleable as clay, reshaped by the potter’s new insights. Thus, one navigates through the fog of uncertainty with a compass that points to possibilities rather than fixed directions.

Reasoning is actually a process of analysis. We say, "If this happened like that and that happened like that, then as a result this must happen like this."  Shall we say?  Really? Or wouldn't we? But even though "this is the result and this is what should happen", they say "if that and that happened, then this must be so too". Here is a monotonous way of thinking for you. However, the solution is in front of us but it cannot be implemented.  Why?  Why persist in monotonous thinking? Instead of doing the opposite and fixing a fault if there is one, why call it that and that, then that? I think I know the reason. It is because “God Everyone” wanted it that way! But both success and happiness lie in non-monotonous thoughts and approaches.

I did a project w a form of nonmonotonic reasoning for DGA. With progressive confirmation/rejection of scenario hypotheses. You do not address that. You seem to work on all-or-nothing logic.