Back to Basics: Belief Revision Through Direct Selection

被引:2
作者
Hansson, Sven Ove [1 ]
机构
[1] Royal Inst Technol KTH, Stockholm, Sweden
关键词
Belief change; Select-and-intersect; Recovery; Expansion property; Finiteness; Ramsey test; Direct selection; Simplicity; Choice function; Selection function; Support function; General input assimilation; Descriptor revision; THEORY CONTRACTION; RAMSEY TEST; LOGIC; RECOVERY;
D O I
10.1007/s11225-018-9807-7
中图分类号
O1 [数学];
学科分类号
0701 ; 070101 ;
摘要
Traditionally, belief change is modelled as the construction of a belief set that satisfies a success condition. The success condition is usually that a specified sentence should be believed (revision) or not believed (contraction). Furthermore, most models of belief change employ a select-and-intersect strategy. This means that a selection is made among primary objects that satisfy the success condition, and the intersection of the selected objects is taken as outcome of the operation. However, the select-and-intersect method is difficult to justify, in particular since the primary objects (usually possible worlds or remainders) are not themselves plausible outcome candidates. Some of the most controversial features of belief change theory, such as recovery and the impossibility of Ramsey test conditionals, are closely connected with the select-and-intersect method. It is proposed that a selection mechanism should instead operate directly on the potential outcomes, and select only one of them. In this way many of the problems that are associated with the select-and-intersect method can be avoided. This model is simpler than previous models in the important Ockhamist sense of doing away with intermediate, cognitively inaccessible objects. However, the role of simplicity as a choice criterion in the direct selection among potential outcomes is left as an open issue.
引用
收藏
页码:887 / 915
页数:29
相关论文
共 50 条
[21]   Interpreting enthymematic arguments using belief revision [J].
Brun, Georg ;
Rott, Hans .
SYNTHESE, 2013, 190 (18) :4041-4063
[22]   Two Approaches to Belief Revision [J].
Shear, Ted ;
Fitelson, Branden .
ERKENNTNIS, 2019, 84 (03) :487-518
[23]   Belief Revision with Bounded Treewidth [J].
Pichler, Reinhard ;
Ruemmele, Stefan ;
Woltran, Stefan .
LOGIC PROGRAMMING AND NONMONOTONIC REASONING, PROCEEDINGS, 2009, 5753 :250-263
[24]   Simple Hyperintensional Belief Revision [J].
Berto, F. .
ERKENNTNIS, 2019, 84 (03) :559-575
[25]   DYNAMIC HYPERINTENSIONAL BELIEF REVISION [J].
Ozgun, Aybuke ;
Berto, Francesco .
REVIEW OF SYMBOLIC LOGIC, 2021, 14 (03) :766-811
[26]   An approximate approach to belief revision [J].
Luan, Shangmin ;
Dai, Guozhong ;
Magnani, Lorenzo .
LOGIC JOURNAL OF THE IGPL, 2012, 20 (02) :486-496
[27]   Elementary Belief Revision Operators [J].
Chandler, Jake ;
Booth, Richard .
JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHICAL LOGIC, 2023, 52 (01) :267-311
[28]   Belief Revision from Probability [J].
Goodman, Jeremy ;
Salow, Bernhard .
ELECTRONIC PROCEEDINGS IN THEORETICAL COMPUTER SCIENCE, 2023, (379) :308-317
[29]   Rational evaluation in belief revision [J].
Yuan, Yongfeng ;
Ju, Shier .
SYNTHESE, 2015, 192 (07) :2311-2336
[30]   Belief revision in Horn theories [J].
Delgrande, James P. ;
Peppas, Pavlos .
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, 2015, 218 :1-22