A sequential reversible belief revision method based on polynomials

This paper deals with iterated belief change and proposes a drastic revision rule that modifies a plausibility ordering of interpretations in such a way that any world where the input observartion holds is more plausible that any world where it does not. This change rule makes sense in a dynamic context where observations are received, and the newer observations are considered more plausible than older ones. It is shown how to encode an epistemic state using polynomials equipped with the lexicographical ordering. This encoding makes it very easy to implement and iterate the revision rule using simple operations on these polynomials. Moreover, polynomials allow to keep track of the sequence of observations. Lastly, it is shown how to efficiently compute the revision rule at the syntactical level, when the epistemic state is concisely represented by a prioritized belief base. Our revision rule is the most drastic one can think of, in accordance with Darwiche and Pearl's principles, and thus contrasts with the minimal change rule called natural belief revision.

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

[2]  Judea Pearl,et al.  System Z: a Natural Ordering of Defaults with Tractable Applications to Nonmonotonic Reasoning^ , 1990 .

[3]  Didier Dubois,et al.  A synthetic view of belief revision with uncertain inputs in the framework of possibility theory , 1997, Int. J. Approx. Reason..

[4]  Craig Boutilier,et al.  Revision Sequences and Nested Conditionals , 1993, IJCAI.

[5]  D. Dubois,et al.  Belief Revision: Belief change and possibility theory , 1992 .

[6]  Judea Pearl,et al.  On the Logic of Iterated Belief Revision , 1994, Artif. Intell..

[7]  Odile Papini Iterated Revision Operations Stemming from the History of an Agent’s Observations , 2001 .

[8]  Craig Boutilier,et al.  A Constraint-Based Approach to Preference Elicitation and Decision Making , 1997 .

[9]  Odile Papini,et al.  Revision in Extended Propositional Calculus , 1995, ECSQARU.

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

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

[12]  Hirofumi Katsuno,et al.  Propositional Knowledge Base Revision and Minimal Change , 1991, Artif. Intell..

[13]  David Makinson,et al.  On the logic of theory change: Safe contraction , 1985, Stud Logica.

[14]  Mary-Anne Williams,et al.  Iterated Theory Base Change: A Computational Model , 1995, IJCAI.