Space-contained conflict revision, for geographic information

Using qualitative reasoning with geographic information, contrarily, for instance, with robotics, looks not only fastidious (i.e.: encoding knowledge Propositional Logics PL), but appears to be computational complex, and not tractable at all, most of the time. However, knowledge fusion or revision, is a common operation performed when users merge several different data sets in a unique decision making process, without much support. Introducing logics would be a great improvement, and we propose in this paper, means for deciding -a priori- if one application can benefit from a complete revision, under only the assumption of a conjecture that we name the "containment conjecture", which limits the size of the minimal conflicts to revise. We demonstrate that this conjecture brings us the interesting computational property of performing a not-provable but global, revision, made of many local revisions, at a tractable size. We illustrate this approach on an application.Comment: 14 page

Decrement Operators in Belief Change

While research on iterated revision is predominant in the field of iterated belief change, the class of iterated contraction operators received more attention in recent years. In this article, we examine a non-prioritized generalisation of iterated contraction. In particular, the class of weak decrement operators is introduced, which are operators that by multiple steps achieve the same as a contraction. Inspired by Darwiche and Pearl's work on iterated revision the subclass of decrement operators is defined. For both, decrement and weak decrement operators, postulates are presented and for each of them a representation theorem in the framework of total preorders is given. Furthermore, we present two sub-types of decrement operators

Abstract Argumentation / Persuasion / Dynamics

The act of persuasion, a key component in rhetoric argumentation, may be viewed as a dynamics modifier. We extend Dung's frameworks with acts of persuasion among agents, and consider interactions among attack, persuasion and defence that have been largely unheeded so far. We characterise basic notions of admissibilities in this framework, and show a way of enriching them through, effectively, CTL (computation tree logic) encoding, which also permits importation of the theoretical results known to the logic into our argumentation frameworks. Our aim is to complement the growing interest in coordination of static and dynamic argumentation.Comment: Arisaka R., Satoh K. (2018) Abstract Argumentation / Persuasion / Dynamics. In: Miller T., Oren N., Sakurai Y., Noda I., Savarimuthu B., Cao Son T. (eds) PRIMA 2018: Principles and Practice of Multi-Agent Systems. PRIMA 2018. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 11224. Springer, Cha

Explaining Evidence Denial as Motivated Pragmatically Rational Epistemic Irrationality

This paper introduces a model for evidence denial that explains this behavior as a manifestation of rationality and it is based on the contention that social values (measurable as utilities) often underwrite these sorts of responses. Moreover, it is contended that the value associated with group membership in particular can override epistemic reason when the expected utility of a belief or belief system is great. However, it is also true that it appears to be the case that it is still possible for such unreasonable believers to reverse this sort of dogmatism and to change their beliefs in a way that is epistemically rational. The conjecture made here is that we should expect this to happen only when the expected utility of the beliefs in question dips below a threshold where the utility value of continued dogmatism and the associated group membership is no longer sufficient to motivate defusing the counter-evidence that tells against such epistemically irrational beliefs

Logics of knowledge and action: critical analysis and challenges

International audienceWe overview the most prominent logics of knowledge and action that were proposed and studied in the multiagent systems literature. We classify them according to these two dimensions, knowledge and action, and moreover introduce a distinction between individual knowledge and group knowledge, and between a nonstrategic an a strategic interpretation of action operators. For each of the logics in our classification we highlight problematic properties. They indicate weaknesses in the design of these logics and call into question their suitability to represent knowledge and reason about it. This leads to a list of research challenges

Negating Rules

none1The paper is intended as a first, tentative, contribution to the clarification of the place that negation has in prescriptive discourse. In particular, the paper analyzes the ways in which rules may be said to be negated and the meanings they assume when they are so regarded. In so doing, the differences between external and internal negation of conditional rules are examined. The paper also deals with the effects of inconsistency between conditional rules, understood as the conjunction of a conditional rule and its corresponding conditional denial. The main result of the paper is that both rules negation and rules inconsistency are unclear concepts, casting their shadows over the very concept of rule.Giovanni Battista RattiRatti, GIOVANNI BATTIST