Multi-Agent Belief Base Revision

We present a generalization of belief base revision to the multi-agent case. In our approach agents have belief bases containing both propositional beliefs and higher-order beliefs about their own beliefs and other agents’ beliefs. Moreover, their belief bases are split in two parts: the mutable part, whose elements may change under belief revision, and the core part, whose elements do not change. We study a belief revision operator inspired by the notion of screened revision. We provide complexity results of model checking for our approach as well as an optimal model checking algorithm. Moreover, we study complexity of epistemic planning formulated in the context of our framework.

[1]  Dana,et al.  JSL volume 88 issue 4 Cover and Front matter , 1983, The Journal of Symbolic Logic.

[2]  Science and Metaphysics: Variations on Kantian Themes , 1982 .

[3]  Jelle Gerbrandy,et al.  Dynamic epistemic logic , 1998 .

[4]  Federica Mandreoli,et al.  Journal of Computer and System Sciences Special Issue on Query Answering on Graph-Structured Data , 2016, Journal of computer and system sciences (Print).

[5]  A. Meyer.  Review: Walter J. Savitch, Relationships between Nondeterministic and Deterministic Tape Complexities , 1974 .

[6]  Arie Tzvieli.  Possibility theory: An approach to computerized processing of uncertainty , 1990, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[7]  Sven Ove Hansson.  Theory Contraction and Base Contraction Unified , 1993, J. Symb. Log..

[8]  Didier Dubois,et al.  A Practical Approach to Revising Prioritized Knowledge Bases , 1999, 1999 Third International Conference on Knowledge-Based Intelligent Information Engineering Systems. Proceedings (Cat. No.99TH8410).

[9]  Wolfgang Spohn,et al.  Ordinal Conditional Functions: A Dynamic Theory of Epistemic States , 1988 .

[10]  Emiliano Lorini,et al.  In Praise of Belief Bases: Doing Epistemic Logic Without Possible Worlds , 2018, AAAI.

[11]  Andrew Coles,et al.  Proceedings of the 22nd European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI 2016) , 2016, ECAI 2016.

[12]  I. G. BONNER CLAPPISON.  Editor , 1960, The Electric Power Engineering Handbook - Five Volume Set.

[13]  Emiliano Lorini,et al.  Rethinking Epistemic Logic with Belief Bases , 2018, Artif. Intell..

[14]  Ronald Fagin,et al.  Reasoning about knowledge , 1995 .

[15]  Sophie Pinchinat,et al.  Small Undecidable Problems in Epistemic Planning , 2018, IJCAI.

[16]  Nils J. Nilsson,et al.  Artificial Intelligence , 1974, IFIP Congress.

[17]  J. Peregrin.  LINGUISTICS AND PHILOSOPHY , 1998 .

[18]  Hans van Ditmarsch,et al.  Prolegomena to Dynamic Logic for Belief Revision , 2005, Synthese.

[19]  Martin C. Cooper,et al.  A Simple Account of Multi-Agent Epistemic Planning , 2016, ECAI.

[20]  Alexandru Baltag,et al.  A qualitative theory of dynamic interactive belief revision , 2008 .

[21]  Johan van Benthem,et al.  Dynamic logic for belief revision , 2007, J. Appl. Non Class. Logics.

[22]  S. Hansson.  A Survey of non-Prioritized Belief Revision , 1999 .

[23]  Walter J. Savitch,et al.  Relationships Between Nondeterministic and Deterministic Tape Complexities , 1970, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[24]  Hector Geffner,et al.  Beliefs In Multiagent Planning: From One Agent to Many , 2015, ICAPS.

[25]  Kai Platschke.  ERKENNTNIS , 2020, Nachhaltigkeit als Marken-Purpose.

[26]  Sophie Pinchinat,et al.  DEL-based epistemic planning: Decidability and complexity , 2020, Artif. Intell..

[27]  Peter Gärdenfors,et al.  On the logic of theory change: Partial meet contraction and revision functions , 1985, Journal of Symbolic Logic.

[28]  Andreas Witzel,et al.  DEL Planning and Some Tractable Cases , 2011, LORI.

[29]  Christian J. Muise,et al.  Planning Over Multi-Agent Epistemic States: A Classical Planning Approach , 2015, AAAI.

[30]  J. Mittelstraß.  Theoria , 2018 .