Prioritized and Non-prioritized Multiple Change on Belief Bases

In this article we explore multiple change operators, i.e., operators in which the epistemic input is a set of sentences instead of a single sentence. We propose two types of change: prioritized change, in which the input set is fully accepted, and symmetric change, where both the epistemic state and the epistemic input are equally treated. In both kinds of operators we propose a set of postulates and we present different constructions: kernel changes and partial meet changes.

[1]  Marco Schaerf,et al.  Arbitration (or How to Merge Knowledge Bases) , 1998, IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng..

[2]  Guillermo Ricardo Simari,et al.  Defeasible logic programming: an argumentative approach , 2003, Theory and Practice of Logic Programming.

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

[4]  Jon Doyle,et al.  Belief Revision: Reason maintenance and belief revision: Foundations versus coherence theories , 1992 .

[5]  Sven Ove Hansson,et al.  Selective Revision , 1999, Stud Logica.

[6]  David Makinson,et al.  Maps between some different kinds of contraction function: The finite case , 1986, Stud Logica.

[7]  Sébastien Konieczny,et al.  On the Logic of Merging , 1998, KR.

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

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

[10]  Guilin Qi,et al.  Prime Implicate-based Belief Revision Operators , 2008, ECAI.

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

[12]  Joseph Y. Halpern,et al.  Belief Revision: A Critique , 1996, J. Log. Lang. Inf..

[13]  S. Hansson.  Belief base dynamics , 1991 .

[14]  Jerusa Marchi,et al.  A Syntactical Approach to Revision , 2004, ECAI.

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

[16]  Maarten de Rijke,et al.  Interleaved contractions , 1999 .

[17]  Sven Ove Hansson,et al.  Revision of Belief Sets and Belief Bases , 1998 .

[18]  Peter Gärdenfors.  Belief Revision: A Vade-Mecum , 1992, META.

[19]  Gabriele Kern-Isberner,et al.  On the Logic of Theory Change: Relations Between Incision and Selection Functions , 2006, ECAI.

[20]  Meghyn Bienvenu,et al.  Prime Implicates and Prime Implicants: From Propositional to Modal Logic , 2009, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[21]  André Fuhrmann.  An Essay on Contraction , 1996 .

[22]  Guillermo Ricardo Simari,et al.  Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence , 2009 .

[23]  Guillermo Ricardo Simari,et al.  Belief dynamics and defeasible argumentation in rational agents , 2004, NMR.

[24]  Pierre Marquis,et al.  A Perspective on Knowledge Compilation , 2001, IJCAI.

[25]  Guillermo Ricardo Simari,et al.  A Mathematical Treatment of Defeasible Reasoning and its Implementation , 1992, Artif. Intell..

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

[27]  Gerhard Weiss,et al.  Multiagent systems: a modern approach to distributed artificial intelligence , 1999 .

[28]  W. Quine.  On Cores and Prime Implicants of Truth Functions , 1959 .

[29]  Jon Doyle,et al.  A Truth Maintenance System , 1979, Artif. Intell..

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

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

[32]  Norman Y. Foo,et al.  Infinitary Belief Revision , 2001, J. Philos. Log..

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

[34]  Pavlos Peppas.  The Limit Assumption and Multiple Revision , 2004, J. Log. Comput..

[35]  Sébastien Konieczny,et al.  Propositional belief base merging or how to merge beliefs/goals coming from several sources and some links with social choice theory , 2005, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

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

[37]  V. S. Costa,et al.  Theory and Practice of Logic Programming , 2010 .

[38]  Marco Schaerf,et al.  Arbitration: A Commutative Operator for Belief Revision , 1995, WOCFAI.

[39]  Reinhard Niederée.  Multiple contraction. A further case against Gärdenfors' principle of recovery , 1989, The Logic of Theory Change.

[40]  Guillermo Ricardo Simari,et al.  Belief Revision and Argumentation Theory , 2009, Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence.

[41]  Stefan Woltran,et al.  AGM-Style Belief Revision of Logic Programs under Answer Set Semantics , 2008, LPNMR.

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

[43]  Eduardo L. Fermé,et al.  Multiple Kernel Contraction , 2003, Stud Logica.

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

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