Minimal belief change, Pareto-optimality and logical consequence
نویسندگان
چکیده
منابع مشابه
Minimal belief change, Pareto-optimality and logical consequence
A rational agent changes her beliefs in response to new information; a widely held idea is that such belief changes should be minimal. This paper is an overview of the theory of minimal belief revision. I employ a decisiontheoretic framework to compare various principles for minimal belief revision. The main topics covered include the AGM postulates for belief revision, belief contraction, Grov...
متن کاملMinimal Belief Change and Pareto-Optimality
This paper analyzes the notion of a minimal belief change that incorporates new information. I apply the fundamental decisiontheoretic principle of Pareto-optimality to derive a notion of minimal belief change, for two different representations of belief: First, for beliefs represented by a theory–a deductively closed set of sentences or propositions–and second for beliefs represented by an axi...
متن کاملMinimal Belief Change and the Pareto Principle
This paper analyzes the notion of a minimal belief change that incorporates new information. I apply the fundamental decision-theoretic principle of Pareto-optimality to derive a notion of minimal belief change, for two different representations of belief: First, for beliefs represented by a theory–a deductively closed set of sentences or propositions–and second for beliefs represented by an ax...
متن کاملLogical Consequence and Logical Expressions
The pretheoretical notions of logical consequence and of a logical expression are linked in vague and complex ways to modal and pragmatic intuitions. I offer an introduction to the difficulties that these intuitions create when one attempts to give precise characterizations of those notions. Special attention is given to Tarski’s theories of logical consequence and logical constancy. I note tha...
متن کاملPropositional Belief Base Update and Minimal Change
In this paper we examine ten concrete propositional update operations of the literature. We start by completely characterizing their relative strength and their computational complexity. Then we evaluate the competing update operations w.r.t. the postulates proposed by Katsuno and Mendelzon. It turns out that the majority violates most of the postulates. We argue that all violated postulates ar...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
ژورنال
عنوان ژورنال: Economic Theory
سال: 2002
ISSN: 0938-2259,1432-0479
DOI: 10.1007/s001990100194