A foundationalist view of the AGM theory of belief change
نویسنده
چکیده
We describe an alternative interpretation of the AGM postulates for belief change (Alchourrón et al., 1985; Gärdenfors, 1988) in a foundational framework of epistemic states suggested by Bochman (1997). Though foundational contractions constitute a new kind of belief contractions, incompatible with AGM postulates, a broad class of preferential AGM contractions is shown to be revisionequivalent to foundational contractions and can actually be produced using a modification of the contraction operation on epistemic states. It is shown also that revisions of epistemic states determine a natural class of preferential AGM revisions, and that all the AGM postulates for revision can be satisfied by imposing reasonable restrictions on underlying epistemic states. As a result, the foundational theory of epistemic states is shown to provide a unification of the main approaches to belief change on a foundationalist basis. 2000 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
منابع مشابه
A Brief Introduction to Belief Revision∗
Running against this principle are Cartesian foundationalist views which contend that, with the exception of core foundational beliefs, the mere fact that a person starts out believing something gives it no privileged position regarding immunity from dismissal, and that only a justification built on foundational beliefs warrants continued belief. Alchourrón, Gärdenfors and Makinson (AGM) carrie...
متن کاملProbabilistic Belief Change: Expansion, Conditioning and Constraining
The AGM theory of belief revision has be come an important paradigm for investigat ing rational belief changes. Unfortunately, researchers working in this paradigm have re stricted much of their attention to rather sim ple representations of belief states, namely logically closed sets of propositional sen tences. In our opinion, this has resulted in a too abstract categorisation of belief ...
متن کاملProbabilistic belief expansion and conditioning
The paper discusses probabilistic belief change, in particular the type of change occurring when information is added which is consistent with the old beliefs. In the AGM theory of belief revision this type of belief change is known as an expansion, and is usually considered to be easy compared to revision and contraction, the two other main types of belief changes the AGM theory distinguishes....
متن کاملBelief Change in Arbitrary Logics
The problem of belief change refers to the updating of a Knowledge Base (KB) in the face of new, possibly contradictory information. The AGM theory, introduced in [1], is the dominating paradigm in the area of belief change. Unfortunately, the assumptions made by the authors of [1] in the formulation of their theory restrict its use to a specific class of logics. In this work, we investigate th...
متن کاملAGM, Ranking Theory, and the Many Ways to Cope with Examples
The paper first explains how the ranking-theoretic belief change or conditionalization rules entail all of the standard AGM belief revision and contraction axioms. Those axioms have met a lot of objections and counter-examples, which thus extend to ranking theory as well. The paper argues for a paradigmatic set of cases that the counter-examples can be well accounted for with various pragmatic ...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید
ثبت ناماگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید
ورودعنوان ژورنال:
- Artif. Intell.
دوره 116 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2000