Kinetic Consistency and Relevance in Belief Revision

被引:16
作者
Peppas, Pavlos [1 ,2 ]
Williams, Mary-Anne [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Patras, Dept Business Adm, Patras, Greece
[2] Univ Technol Sydney, QCIS, Fac Engn & IT, Ultimo, Australia
来源
LOGICS IN ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, (JELIA 2016) | 2016年 / 10021卷
关键词
LOGIC;
D O I
10.1007/978-3-319-48758-8_26
中图分类号
TP18 [人工智能理论];
学科分类号
081104 ; 0812 ; 0835 ; 1405 ;
摘要
A critical aspect of rational belief revision that has been neglected by the classical AGM framework is what we call the principle of kinetic consistency. Loosely speaking, this principle dictates that the revision policies employed by a rational agent at different belief sets, are not independent, but ought to be related in a certain way. We formalise kinetic consistency axiomatically and semantically, and we establish a representation result explicitly connecting the two. We then combine the postulates for kinetic consistency, with Parikh's postulate for relevant change, and add them to the classical AGM postulates for revision; we call this augmented set the extended AGM postulates. We prove the consistency and demonstrate the scope of the extended AGM postulates by showing that a whole new class of concrete revision operators introduced hererin, called PD operators, satisfies all extended AGM postulates. PD operators are of interest in their own right as they are natural generalisations of Dalal's revision operator. We conclude the paper with some examples illustrating the strength of the extended AGM postulates, even for iterated revision scenarios.
引用
收藏
页码:401 / 414
页数:14
相关论文
共 12 条
  • [1] ON THE LOGIC OF THEORY CHANGE - PARTIAL MEET CONTRACTION AND REVISION FUNCTIONS
    ALCHOURRON, CE
    GARDENFORS, P
    MAKINSON, D
    [J]. JOURNAL OF SYMBOLIC LOGIC, 1985, 50 (02) : 510 - 530
  • [2] Dalal Mukesh, 1988, P 7 NAT C ART INT AA, P475
  • [3] On the logic of iterated belief revision
    Darwiche, A
    Pearl, J
    [J]. ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, 1997, 89 (1-2) : 1 - 29
  • [4] GROVE A, 1988, J PHILOS LOGIC, V17, P157
  • [5] Iterated belief revision, revised
    Jin, Yi
    Thielscher, Michael
    [J]. ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, 2007, 171 (01) : 1 - 18
  • [6] PROPOSITIONAL KNOWLEDGE BASE REVISION AND MINIMAL CHANGE
    KATSUNO, H
    MENDELZON, AO
    [J]. ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, 1991, 52 (03) : 263 - 294
  • [7] Konieczny S., 2000, J. Appl. Non-Class. Log., V10, P339
  • [8] Dynamic belief revision operators
    Nayak, AC
    Pagnucco, M
    Peppas, P
    [J]. ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, 2003, 146 (02) : 193 - 228
  • [9] Parikh Rohit, 1999, LOGIC LANGUAGE COMPU, V2, P266
  • [10] Relevance in belief revision
    Peppas, Pavlos
    Williams, Mary-Anne
    Chopra, Samir
    Foo, Norman
    [J]. ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, 2015, 229 : 126 - 138