Non-monotonic Reasoning and the Reversibility of Belief Change
نویسنده
چکیده
Traditional approaches to non-monotonic reasoning fail to satisfy a number of plausible axioms for belief revision and suffer from conceptual difficulties as well. Recent work on ranked preferential models (RPMs) promises to overcome some of these difficulties. Here we show that RPMs are not adequate to handle iterated belief change. Specifically, we show that RPMs do not always allow for the reversibility of belief change. 1bis result indicates the need for numerical strengths of belief.
منابع مشابه
Belief Change in a Preferential Non-monotonic Framework
Belief change and non-monotonic reasoning are usually viewed as two sides of the same coin, with results showing that one can formally be defined in terms of the other. In this paper we show that we can also integrate the two formalisms by studying belief change within a (preferential) non-monotonic framework. This integration relies heavily on the identification of the monotonic core of a non-...
متن کاملDescribing Plan Recognition as Nonmonotonic Reasoning and Belief Revision
We provide a characterization of plan recognition in terms of a general framework of belief revision and non-monotonic reasoning. We adopt a generalization of classical belief revision to describe a competence model of plan recognition which supports dynamic change to all aspects of a plan recognition knowledge base, including background knowledge, action descriptions and their relationship to ...
متن کاملNon Monotonic Reasoning and Belief
The major approaches to belief revision and non monotonic reasoning proposed in the literature diier along a number of dimensions, including whether they are \syntax-based" or \semantic-based", \foundational" or \coherentist", \consistence{restoring" or \inconsistency{tolerant". Our contribution towards clarifying the connections between these various approaches is threefold: We show that the t...
متن کاملA conceptual framework for (iterated) revision, update, and nonmonotonic reasoning
This paper makes a foundational contribution to the discussions on the very nature of belief change operations. Belief revision and belief update are investigated within an abstract framework of epistemic states and (qualitative or quantitative) conditionals. Moreover, we distinguish between background knowledge and contextual information in order to analyse belief change more appropriately. Th...
متن کاملBelief Change in Nonmonotonic Multi-Context Systems
Brewka and Eiter’s nonmonotonic multi-context systems is an elegant knowledge representation framework to model heterogeneous and nonmonotonic multiple contexts. Belief change is a central problem in knowledge representation and reasoning. In the paper we follow the classical AGM approach to investigate belief change in multi-context systems. Specifically, we semantically formulate the AGM post...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
دوره شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 1991