26,118 research outputs found
The lexicographic closure as a revision process
The connections between nonmonotonic reasoning and belief revision are
well-known. A central problem in the area of nonmonotonic reasoning is the
problem of default entailment, i.e., when should an item of default information
representing "if A is true then, normally, B is true" be said to follow from a
given set of items of such information. Many answers to this question have been
proposed but, surprisingly, virtually none have attempted any explicit
connection to belief revision. The aim of this paper is to give an example of
how such a connection can be made by showing how the lexicographic closure of a
set of defaults may be conceptualised as a process of iterated revision by sets
of sentences. Specifically we use the revision process of Nayak.Comment: 7 pages, Nonmonotonic Reasoning Workshop 2000 (special session on
belief change), at KR200
Independence - revision and defaults
We investigate different aspects of independence here, in the context of
theory revision, generalizing slightly work by Chopra, Parikh, and Rodrigues,
and in the context of preferential reasoning
Multi-Agent Only-Knowing Revisited
Levesque introduced the notion of only-knowing to precisely capture the
beliefs of a knowledge base. He also showed how only-knowing can be used to
formalize non-monotonic behavior within a monotonic logic. Despite its appeal,
all attempts to extend only-knowing to the many agent case have undesirable
properties. A belief model by Halpern and Lakemeyer, for instance, appeals to
proof-theoretic constructs in the semantics and needs to axiomatize validity as
part of the logic. It is also not clear how to generalize their ideas to a
first-order case. In this paper, we propose a new account of multi-agent
only-knowing which, for the first time, has a natural possible-world semantics
for a quantified language with equality. We then provide, for the propositional
fragment, a sound and complete axiomatization that faithfully lifts Levesque's
proof theory to the many agent case. We also discuss comparisons to the earlier
approach by Halpern and Lakemeyer.Comment: Appears in Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning 201
- …