Knowledge-Level Analysis of Belief Base Operations

Abstract Recent developments in philosophical studies of belief revision have led to the construction of models that are much closer to actual computing systems than the earlier models. An operation of contraction (revision) on a logically closed belief set can be obtained by assigning to it a finite belief base and an operation of contraction (revision) on that base. Exact characterizations of such base-generated operations have been o btained. In this way, computational tractability and other realistic properties of operations on finite bases can be combined with a precise analysis that is independent of the symbolic representation.

[1]  Peter Gärdenfors,et al.  The Dynamics of Belief Systems : Foundations vs . Coherence Theories , 1990 .

[2]  Hector J. Levesque,et al.  What Makes a Knowledge Base Knowledgeable? A View of Databases from the Knowledge Level , 1984, Expert Database Workshop.

[3]  SVEN OVE HANSSON,et al.  Reversing the Levi identity , 1993, J. Philos. Log..

[4]  Larry Kerschberg.  Expert Database Systems, Proceedings From the First international Workshop, Kiawah Island, South Carolina, USA, October 24-27, 1984 , 1986 .

[5]  Peter Gärdenfors,et al.  Belief Revision , 1995 .

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

[7]  Sven Ove Hansson,et al.  Belief contraction without recovery , 1991, Stud Logica.

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

[9]  Sven Ove Hansson,et al.  Similarity semantics and minimal changes of belief , 1992 .

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

[11]  H. Kyburg.  The Fixation of Belief and Its Undoing , 1994 .

[12]  Stuart C. Shapiro,et al.  A Model for Belief Revision , 1988, Artif. Intell..

[13]  Sven Ove Hansson,et al.  Changes of disjunctively closed bases , 1993, J. Log. Lang. Inf..

[14]  A. Sen,et al.  Collective Choice and Social Welfare , 2017 .

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

[16]  Sven Ove Hansson,et al.  Theory contraction and base contraction unified , 1993, Journal of Symbolic Logic.

[17]  I. Levi.  Subjunctives, dispositions and chances , 1977, Synthese.

[18]  Wlodzimierz Rabinowicz,et al.  Epistemic entrenchment with incomparabilities and relational belief revision , 1989, The Logic of Theory Change.

[19]  Peter Gärdenfors,et al.  Knowledge, belief, and strategic interaction: The dynamics of belief systems: Foundations versus coherence theories , 1992 .

[20]  Carlos E. Alchourrón,et al.  Hierarchies of Regulations and their Logic , 1981 .

[21]  André Fuhrmann,et al.  The Logic of Theory Change , 1991, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[22]  David Makinson,et al.  New studies in deontic logic , 1981 .

[23]  David Makinson,et al.  On the status of the postulate of recovery in the logic of theory change , 1987, J. Philos. Log..

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

[25]  Allen Newell,et al.  The Knowledge Level , 1989, Artif. Intell..

[26]  André Fuhrmann,et al.  Theory contraction through base contraction , 1991, J. Philos. Log..