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

Balancing between cognitive and semantic acceptability of arguments

This paper addresses the problem concerning approximating human cognitions and semantic extensions regarding acceptability status of arguments. We introduce three types of logical equilibriums in terms of satisfiability, entailment and semantic equivalence in order to analyse balance of human cognitions and semantic extensions. The generality of our proposal is shown by the existence conditions of equilibrium solutions. The applicability of our proposal is demonstrated by the fact that it detects a flaw of argumentation actually taking place in an online forum and suggests its possible resolution

Algebras of Measurements: the logical structure of Quantum Mechanics

In Quantum Physics, a measurement is represented by a projection on some closed subspace of a Hilbert space. We study algebras of operators that abstract from the algebra of projections on closed subspaces of a Hilbert space. The properties of such operators are justified on epistemological grounds. Commutation of measurements is a central topic of interest. Classical logical systems may be viewed as measurement algebras in which all measurements commute. Keywords: Quantum measurements, Measurement algebras, Quantum Logic. PACS: 02.10.-v.Comment: Submitted, 30 page

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

Expressing Belief Flow in Assertion Networks

Abstract. In the line of some earlier work done on belief dynamics, we propose an abstract model of belief propagation on a graph based on the methodology of the revision theory of truth. A modal language is developed for portraying the behavior of this model, and its expressiveness is discussed. We compare the proposal of this model as well as the language developed with some of the existing frameworks for modelling communication situations.

Taking Defeasible Entailment Beyond Rational Closure

We present a systematic approach for extending the KLM framework for defeasible entailment. We first present a class of basic defeasible entailment relations, characterise it in three distinct ways and provide a high-level algorithm for computing it. This framework is then refined, with the refined version being characterised in a similar manner. We show that the two well-known forms of defeasible entailment, rational closure and lexicographic closure, fall within our refined framework, that rational closure is the most conservative of the defeasible entailment relations within the framework (with respect to subset inclusion), but that there are forms of defeasible entailment within our framework that are more “adventurous” than lexicographic closure