On the revision of informant credibility orders

In this paper we propose an approach to multi-source belief revision where the trust or credibility assigned to informant agents can be revised. In our proposal, the credibility of each informant represented as a strict partial order among informant agents, will be maintained in a repository called credibility base. Upon arrival of new information concerning the credibility of its peers, an agent will be capable of revising this strict partial order, changing the trust assigned to its peers accordingly. Our goal is to formalize a set of change operators over the credibility base: expansion, contraction, prioritized, and non-prioritized revision. These operators will provide the capability of dynamically modifying the credibility of informants considering the reliability of the information. This dynamics will reflect a new perception of trust assigned to the informant, or extend the set of informants by admitting the addition of new informant agents.

[1]  Pierre-Yves Schobbens,et al.  Operators and Laws for Combining Preference Relations , 2002, J. Log. Comput..

[2]  Peter Gärdenfors,et al.  Knowledge in Flux: Modeling the Dynamics of Epistemic States , 2008 .

[3]  Moshe Tennenholtz,et al.  Multi-Agent Belief Revision , 1996, TARK.

[4]  Guillermo Ricardo Simari,et al.  Explanations, belief revision and defeasible reasoning , 2002, Artif. Intell..

[5]  Jordi Sabater-Mir,et al.  Review on Computational Trust and Reputation Models , 2005, Artificial Intelligence Review.

[6]  Eduardo L. Fermé,et al.  System of Spheres-based Multiple Contractions , 2011, J. Philos. Log..

[7]  Wei Liu,et al.  A Framework for Multi-Agent Belief Revision, Part I: The Role of Ontology , 1999, Australian Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence.

[8]  Craig Boutilier,et al.  Belief Revision with Unreliable Observations , 1998, AAAI/IAAI.

[9]  Guillermo Ricardo Simari,et al.  Modeling knowledge dynamics in multi-agent systems based on informants , 2012, Knowl. Eng. Rev..

[10]  John Cantwell,et al.  Resolving Conflicting Information , 1998, J. Log. Lang. Inf..

[11]  Sven Ove Hansson.  Belief Revision: A dyadic representation of belief , 1992 .

[12]  Guillermo Ricardo Simari,et al.  Consistency Maintenance of Plausible Belief Bases Based on Agents Credibility , 2008 .

[13]  Wei Liu,et al.  A Framework for Multi-Agent Belief Revision , 2001, Stud Logica.

[14]  Aldo Franco Dragoni,et al.  Distributed belief revision versus distributed truth maintenance , 1994, Proceedings Sixth International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence. TAI 94.

[15]  Guillermo Ricardo Simari,et al.  A Change Model for Credibility Partial Order , 2011, SUM.

[16]  Eduardo L. Fermé,et al.  Credibility-limited Functions for Belief Bases , 2003, J. Log. Comput..

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

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

[19]  Sébastien Konieczny,et al.  Improvement Operators , 2008, KR.

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

[21]  Sven Ove Hansson.  Kernel Contraction , 1994, J. Symb. Log..

[22]  Weiru Liu,et al.  Revising Partial Pre-Orders with Partial Pre-Orders: A Unit-Based Revision Framework , 2012, KR.

[23]  C. E. Alchourrón,et al.  On the logic of theory change: Partial meet contraction and revision functions , 1985 .

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

[25]  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).

[26]  Weiru Liu,et al.  A framework for managing uncertain inputs: An axiomization of rewarding , 2011, Int. J. Approx. Reason..

[27]  C. Sierra,et al.  REGRET: A reputation model for gregarious societies , 2001 .

[28]  John Cantwell,et al.  Credibility limited revision , 2001, Journal of Symbolic Logic.

[29]  André Fuhrmann,et al.  A survey of multiple contractions , 1994, J. Log. Lang. Inf..

[30]  Richard Booth,et al.  Social contraction and belief negotiation , 2002, Inf. Fusion.

[31]  Thomas Andreas Meyer,et al.  Non-Prioritized Ranked Belief Change , 2001, J. Philos. Log..

[32]  Laurence Cholvy.  Plausibility of Information Reported by Successive Sources , 2010, SUM.

[33]  Abhaya C. Nayak.  Trust in Context , 2012, Australasian Conference on Artificial Intelligence.

[34]  Sébastien Konieczny,et al.  Merging Information Under Constraints: A Logical Framework , 2002, J. Log. Comput..

[35]  Odile Papini,et al.  Revision of Partially Ordered Information: Axiomatization, Semantics and Iteration , 2005, IJCAI.

[36]  Eduardo L. Fermé,et al.  Possible Worlds Semantics for Partial Meet Multiple Contraction , 2011, Journal of Philosophical Logic.

[37]  Isaac Levi.  Subjunctives, dispositions and chances , 1977 .

[38]  Nicholas R. Jennings,et al.  Belief Revision in Multi-Agent Systems , 1994, ECAI.

[39]  Abhaya C. Nayak.  The Deficit and Dynamics of Trust , 2010, 2010 IEEE/IFIP International Conference on Embedded and Ubiquitous Computing.

[40]  Sven Ove Hansson,et al.  A textbook of belief dynamics - theory change and database updating , 1999, Applied logic series.

[41]  Alejandro Javier García,et al.  Forwarding Credible Information in Multi-agent Systems , 2009, KSEM.

[42]  A. Schwab,et al.  Epistemic trust, epistemic responsibility, and medical practice. , 2008, The Journal of medicine and philosophy.

[43]  Chrysanthos Dellarocas,et al.  The Digitization of Word-of-Mouth: Promise and Challenges of Online Feedback Mechanisms , 2003, Manag. Sci..

[44]  Guillermo Ricardo Simari,et al.  Revision of informant plausibility in multi-agent system , 2001 .