论文信息 - Entrenchment Kinematics 101

Entrenchment Kinematics 101

The AGM framework of belief dynamics fails to account for iterated belief change. This paper extends the AGM framework in order to solve this problem. As in the AGM, an epistemic input is represented as a single sentence. Unlike the AGM, however , a belief state is represented as an epistemic entrenchment relation. Three state transition functions { namely, entrenchment expansion, entrenchment contraction and entrenchment revision { are constructed that preserve the basic appeal of the AGM system.

Maurice PagnuccoKnowledge

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

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

[3] P. Gärdenfors,et al. Revisions of Knowledge Systems Using Epistemic Entrenchment , 1988, TARK.

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

[5] Hans Rott,et al. Two methods of constructing contractions and revisions of knowledge systems , 1991, J. Philos. Log..

[6] Karl Schlechta,et al. Theory Revision and Probability , 1991, Notre Dame J. Formal Log..

[7] Fachgruppe Philosophie,et al. Preferential Belief Change Using Generalized Epistemic Entrenchment , 1992 .

[8] H. Kyburg. Iterated Belief Change Based on Epistemic Entrenchment* , 1994 .

[9] Mary-Anne Williams,et al. Transmutations of Knowledge Systems , 1994, KR.