The Complexity of Mode Checking for

One of the main challenges in the formal modeling of common-sense reasoning is the ability to cope with the dynamic nature of the world. Among the approaches put forward to address this problem are belief revisioPz and update. Given a knowledge base T, representing our knowledge of the “state of affairs” of the world of interest, it is possible that we are lead to trust another piece of information P, possibly inconsistent with the old one 7’. The aim of revision and update operators is to characterize the revised knowledge base T’ that incorporates the new formula P into the old one T while preserving consistency and, at the same time, avoiding the loss of too much information in this process. In this paper we study the computational complexity of one of the main computational problems of belief revision and update: deciding if an interpretation M is a model of the revised knowledge base.

[1]  Hirofumi Katsuno,et al.  A Unified View of Propositional Knowledge Base Updates , 1989, IJCAI.

[2]  Ronald Fagin,et al.  On the semantics of updates in databases , 1983, PODS.

[3]  Marianne Winslett.  Sometimes Updates Are Circumscription , 1989, IJCAI.

[4]  Larry J. Stockmeyer,et al.  The Polynomial-Time Hierarchy , 1976, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[5]  Gabriel M. Kuper,et al.  Updating Logical Databases , 1986, Adv. Comput. Res..

[6]  Mukesh Dalal,et al.  Investigations into a Theory of Knowledge Base Revision , 1988, AAAI.

[7]  Bart Selman,et al.  The Comparative Linguistics of Knowledge Representation , 1995, IJCAI.

[8]  Ken Satoh.  Nonmonotonic Reasoning by Minimal Belief Revision , 1988, FGCS.

[9]  David S. Johnson,et al.  A Catalog of Complexity Classes , 1991, Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science, Volume A: Algorithms and Complexity.

[10]  Francesco M. Donini,et al.  The size of a revised knowledge base , 1995, PODS '95.

[11]  Georg Gottlob,et al.  On the complexity of propositional knowledge base revision, updates, and counterfactuals , 1992, Artif. Intell..

[12]  J. Van Leeuwen,et al.  Handbook of theoretical computer science - Part A: Algorithms and complexity; Part B: Formal models and semantics , 1990 .

[13]  Kenneth D. Forbus.  Introducing Actions into Qualitative Simulation , 1989, IJCAI.

[14]  Francesco M. Donini,et al.  On Compact Representations of Propositional Circumscription , 1995, STACS.

[15]  Joseph Y. Halpern,et al.  Model Checking vs. Theorem Proving: A Manifesto , 1991, KR.

[16]  Bernard A. Engel,et al.  Knowledge transformation , 1990, Appl. Artif. Intell..

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

[18]  P G rdenfors,et al.  Knowledge in flux: modeling the dynamics of epistemic states , 1988 .

[19]  Bernhard Nebel,et al.  Belief Revision and Default Reasoning: Syntax-Based Approaches , 1991, KR.

[20]  Hirofumi Katsuno,et al.  On the Difference between Updating a Knowledge Base and Revising It , 1991, KR.

[21]  Alexander Borgida,et al.  Language features for flexible handling of exceptions in information systems , 1985, TODS.

[22]  Georg Gottlob,et al.  On the Complexity of Propositional Knowledge Base Revision, Updates, and Counterfactuals , 1992, Artif. Intell..