Gardenfors, P. (1990) Belief Revision and Nonmonotonic Logic: Two Sides of the Same Coin?, Proceedings of the Ninth European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 768-773. Home/Search Document Not in Database Summary Related Articles Check |
This paper is cited in the following contexts:
How Hard is it to Revise a Belief Base? - Nebel (1996) (Correct)
....right nested conditionals that correspond to iterated base revisions have the same complexity as single revisions. 22 Arbitrarily nested conditionals can become as hard as PSPACE complete, however. 9.3 Nonmonotonic Logics Belief revision and nonmonotonic logics are also quite closely related. Gardenfors [ 1990 ] for example, called belief revision and nonmonotonic logics two sides of the same coin. In fact, a number of desirable properties of nonmonotonic logics [ Kraus et al. 1990; Lehman and Magidor, 1992 ] have direct counter parts as postulates in belief revision and vice versa [ Makinson and ....
Peter Gardenfors. Belief revision and nonmonotonic logic: Two sides of the same coin? In Proceedings of the 9th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI-90), pages 768--773, Stockholm, Sweden, August 1990. Pitman.
Syntax-Based Approaches to Belief Revision - Nebel (1992) (47 citations) (Correct)
....this book) In Section 5 some interesting special cases of epistemic relevance are analyzed that lead to the satisfaction of all AGM postulates. In particular, we show that epistemic entrenchment as introduced in (Gardenfors, Makinson 1988) is a special case of epistemic relevance. Makinson and Gardenfors (1990) showed that there is a tight connection between belief revision and nonmonotonic logics. In Section 6 we will strengthen this result. First, we show that the form of logical nonmonotonicity observable when revising beliefs is a necessary consequence of temporal nonmonotonicity induced by belief ....
....we have Cn(OE) K : OE. Now assume there is a proposition 2 K : OE such that 62 Cn(OE) By (43) we would have K : OE K : OE) However, this would violate (K : 2) or (K : 5) Thus, if the basic postulates and (43) are satisfied, Cn( OE = Cn(OE) Makinson and Gardenfors (1990) use this similarity of logical nonmonotonicity and the nonmonotonicity of belief revision in the second operand as a starting point to investigate the relationship between nonmonotonic logics and belief revision on a very general level. They compare various general conditions on nonmonotonic ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
Gardenfors, P. (1990): Belief Revision and Nonmonotonic Logic: Two Sides of the Same Coin?, in: Aiello, L. C. (ed.): Proceedings of the 9th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Stockholm, Sweden, 768--773.
Belief Revision and Default Reasoning: Syntax-Based Approaches - Nebel (1991) (65 citations) (Correct)
....obey, however. In Section 5 some interesting special cases of epistemic relevance are analyzed that satisfy all rationality postulates. In particular, we show that epistemic entrenchment as introduced in [ Gardenfors and Makinson, 1988 ] is a special case of epistemic relevance. Makinson and Gardenfors [ 1990 ] showed that there is a tight connection between belief revision and nonmonotonic logics. In Section 6 we will strengthen this result. First, we show that the form of logical nonmonotonicity observable when revising beliefs is a necessary consequence of temporal nonmonotonicity induced by ....
....9 Let : be a belief revision operation defined on a belief set A. If for all x; y A : x A : y if Cn(x) Cn(y) 21) then 1. A = Cn( and A : x = Cn(x) or 2. A = Cn( and A : x = Cn(x) or 3. violates at least one of the basic Gardenfors postulates. Makinson and Gardenfors [ 1990 ] use this similarity of logical nonmonotonicity and the nonmonotonicity of belief revision in the second operand as a starting point to investigate the relationship between nonmonotonic logics and belief revision on an very general and abstract level. They compare various general conditions on ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
Peter Gardenfors. Belief revision and nonmonotonic logic: Two sides of the same coin? In L. C. Aiello, editor, Proceedings of the 9th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 768--773, Stockholm, Sweden, August 1990.
The Implementation of a First-Order Logic AGM Belief Revision.. - Simon Dixon And (1993) (6 citations) (Correct)
No context found.
Gardenfors, P. (1990) Belief Revision and Nonmonotonic Logic: Two Sides of the Same Coin?, Proceedings of the Ninth European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 768-773.
A Model For Belief Revision In A Multi-Agent Environment - Dragoni (1991) (3 citations) (Correct)
No context found.
: Peter Gardenfors, Belief Revision and Nonmonotonic Logic: Two Sides of the Same Coin?, Proceedings of the 9th European Confference on Artificial Intelligence, L. C. Aiello ed., Pitman Publishing, London, 1990.
Online articles have much greater impact More about CiteSeer.IST Add search form to your site Submit documents Feedback
CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC