Revision by comparison

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Fermé, Eduardo
Data de Publicação: 2004
Outros Autores: Rott, Hans
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
Texto Completo: http://hdl.handle.net/10400.13/3456
Resumo: Since the early 1980s, logical theories of belief revision have offered formal methods for the transformation of knowledge bases or “corpora” of data and beliefs. Early models have dealt with unconditional acceptance and integration of potentially belief-contravening pieces of information into the existing corpus. More recently, models of “non-prioritized” revision were proposed that allow the agent rationally to refuse to accept the new information. This paper introduces a refined method for changing beliefs by specifying constraints on the relative plausibility of propositions. Like the earlier belief revision models, the method proposed is a qualitative one, in the sense that no numbers are needed in order to specify the posterior plausibility of the new information. We use reference beliefs in order to determine the degree of entrenchment of the newly accepted piece of information. We provide two kinds of semantics for this idea, give a logical characterization of the new model, study its relation with other operations of belief revision and contraction, and discuss its intuitive strengths and weaknesses.
id RCAP_4930be6d44bf156201951a5d7f1bbec9
oai_identifier_str oai:digituma.uma.pt:10400.13/3456
network_acronym_str RCAP
network_name_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository_id_str 7160
spelling Revision by comparisonBelief revisionTheory changeSphere semanticsEpistemic entrenchmentAGM approachIterated revisionNon-prioritized revisionSevere withdrawalIrrevocable revision.Faculdade de Ciências Exatas e da EngenhariaSince the early 1980s, logical theories of belief revision have offered formal methods for the transformation of knowledge bases or “corpora” of data and beliefs. Early models have dealt with unconditional acceptance and integration of potentially belief-contravening pieces of information into the existing corpus. More recently, models of “non-prioritized” revision were proposed that allow the agent rationally to refuse to accept the new information. This paper introduces a refined method for changing beliefs by specifying constraints on the relative plausibility of propositions. Like the earlier belief revision models, the method proposed is a qualitative one, in the sense that no numbers are needed in order to specify the posterior plausibility of the new information. We use reference beliefs in order to determine the degree of entrenchment of the newly accepted piece of information. We provide two kinds of semantics for this idea, give a logical characterization of the new model, study its relation with other operations of belief revision and contraction, and discuss its intuitive strengths and weaknesses.ElsevierDigitUMaFermé, EduardoRott, Hans2021-05-28T14:20:26Z2004-01-01T00:00:00Z2004-01-01T00:00:00Zinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/10400.13/3456engFermé, E., & Rott, H. (2004). Revision by comparison. Artificial Intelligence, 157(1-2), 5-47.10.1016/j.artint.2004.04.007info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAP2022-09-05T12:56:25Zoai:digituma.uma.pt:10400.13/3456Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-19T15:06:30.628287Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Revision by comparison
title Revision by comparison
spellingShingle Revision by comparison
Fermé, Eduardo
Belief revision
Theory change
Sphere semantics
Epistemic entrenchment
AGM approach
Iterated revision
Non-prioritized revision
Severe withdrawal
Irrevocable revision
.
Faculdade de Ciências Exatas e da Engenharia
title_short Revision by comparison
title_full Revision by comparison
title_fullStr Revision by comparison
title_full_unstemmed Revision by comparison
title_sort Revision by comparison
author Fermé, Eduardo
author_facet Fermé, Eduardo
Rott, Hans
author_role author
author2 Rott, Hans
author2_role author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv DigitUMa
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Fermé, Eduardo
Rott, Hans
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Belief revision
Theory change
Sphere semantics
Epistemic entrenchment
AGM approach
Iterated revision
Non-prioritized revision
Severe withdrawal
Irrevocable revision
.
Faculdade de Ciências Exatas e da Engenharia
topic Belief revision
Theory change
Sphere semantics
Epistemic entrenchment
AGM approach
Iterated revision
Non-prioritized revision
Severe withdrawal
Irrevocable revision
.
Faculdade de Ciências Exatas e da Engenharia
description Since the early 1980s, logical theories of belief revision have offered formal methods for the transformation of knowledge bases or “corpora” of data and beliefs. Early models have dealt with unconditional acceptance and integration of potentially belief-contravening pieces of information into the existing corpus. More recently, models of “non-prioritized” revision were proposed that allow the agent rationally to refuse to accept the new information. This paper introduces a refined method for changing beliefs by specifying constraints on the relative plausibility of propositions. Like the earlier belief revision models, the method proposed is a qualitative one, in the sense that no numbers are needed in order to specify the posterior plausibility of the new information. We use reference beliefs in order to determine the degree of entrenchment of the newly accepted piece of information. We provide two kinds of semantics for this idea, give a logical characterization of the new model, study its relation with other operations of belief revision and contraction, and discuss its intuitive strengths and weaknesses.
publishDate 2004
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2004-01-01T00:00:00Z
2004-01-01T00:00:00Z
2021-05-28T14:20:26Z
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/10400.13/3456
url http://hdl.handle.net/10400.13/3456
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv Fermé, E., & Rott, H. (2004). Revision by comparison. Artificial Intelligence, 157(1-2), 5-47.
10.1016/j.artint.2004.04.007
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Elsevier
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Elsevier
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron:RCAAP
instname_str Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron_str RCAAP
institution RCAAP
reponame_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
collection Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1799129935476948992