{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03230769230769231, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.445544554455446, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Reasoning with contradictory information using quasi-classical logic

The proof theory of quasi-classical logic (QC logic) allows the derivation of non-trivializable classical inferences from inconsistent information. A non-trivializable, or paraconsistent, logic is, by necessity, a compromise, or weakening, of classical logic. The compromises on QC logic seem to be more appropriate than other paraconsistent logics for applications in computing. In particular, the connectives behave in a classical manner. Here we motivate the need for QC logic, present a proof theory, and semantics for the logic, and compare it to other paraconsistent logics.