Conciliation and consensus in iterated belief merging

Two conciliation processes for intelligent agents based on an iterated merge-then-revise change function for belief profiles are introduced and studied. The first approach is skeptical in the sense that at any revision step, each agent considers that her current beliefs are more important than the current beliefs of the group, while the other case is considered in the second, credulous approach. Some key features of such conciliation processes are pointed out for several merging operators; especially, the convergence issue, the existence of consensus and the properties of the induced iterated merging operators are investigated.