Dynamic Doxastic Probability Logic
نویسنده
چکیده
In this paper we will propose a dynamic doxastic probability logic which is inspired by two already existing systems and tries to meet them somewhere in between. On the one hand you have the original simple Kooi system of public announcement logic with hard public information only, and on the other hand you have the very rich and powerful BGK system of van Benthem, Gerbandy and Kooi [5]. Public announcement logic is built on a static logic which models the knowledge of agents by their information states. This system is made dynamic by the public announcement operator. The idea is that only truthful information can be announced and that the announcement is public (reaches everyone of the group). Along the same line there is the dynamic doxastic logic, which except for knowledge, also models beliefs of agents. Beliefs are modeled by an ordering relation which specifies which world is more plausible than another world. The update modalities in this logic consist of updates in the plausibility order. Note that this logic can only express updates that make certain worlds top worlds, since the language of beliefs only allows one to speak about the top worlds. Changing the order among worlds without one of them becoming top worlds is not expressible here. Extensions of this kind of dynamic epistemic logics with probabilistic information have been investigated by several researchers ([3], [4] and [5]). In this paper we will focus on the work of van Benthem, Gerbrandy and Kooi [5], which is a subsuming of the other two systems. The BGK system is a complete probability update logic. As static language they take a simple instance of a system described by Halpern and Tutle [2] and further developed by Fagin and Halpern [1] (of which we will use a simple instance in this paper). Then they use probabilistic update models as update modality
منابع مشابه
A quantitative doxastic logic for probabilistic processes and applications to information-hiding
We introduce a novel modal logic, namely the doxastic μ-calculus with error control (DμCEC), and propose a formalization of probabilistic anonymity and oblivious transfer in the logic, and the validation of these formalizations on implementations formalized in probabilistic CCS. The distinguishing feature of our logic is to provide a combination of dynamic operators for belief (whence the attri...
متن کاملDDL as an “Internalization” of Dynamic Belief Revision
In this paper we re-evaluate Segerberg’s “full DDL” (Dynamic Doxastic Logic) from the perspective of Dynamic Epistemic Logic (DEL), in its beliefrevision-friendly incarnation. We argue that a correct version of full DDL must give up the Success Postulate for dynamic revision. Next, we present (an appropriately generalized and simplified version of) full DDL, showing that it is a generalization ...
متن کاملThe Logic of Conditional Doxastic Actions: A theory of dynamic multi-agent belief revision
We present a logic of conditional doxastic actions, obtained by incorporating ideas from belief revision theory into the usual dynamic logic of epistemic actions. We do this by extending to actions the setting of epistemic plausibility models, developed in Baltag and Smets (2006) for representing (static) conditional beliefs. We introduce a natural extension of the notion of update product from...
متن کاملLearning by Erasing in Dynamic Epistemic Logic
This work provides a comparison of learning by erasing [1] and iterated epistemic update [2] as analyzed in dynamic epistemic logic (see e.g. [3]). We show that finite identification can be modelled in dynamic epistemic logic and that the elimination process of learning by erasing can be seen as iterated belief-revision modelled in dynamic doxastic logic.
متن کاملEquivalent Beliefs in Dynamic Doxastic Logic
Two propositions may be regarded as doxastically equivalent if revision of an agent’s beliefs to adopt either has the same effect on the agent’s belief state. We enrich the language of dynamic doxastic logic with formulas expressing this notion of equivalence, and provide it with a formal semantics. A finitary proof system is then defined and shown to be sound and complete for this semantics.
متن کامل