Hirofumi Katsuno and Ken Satoh. A unified view of consequence relation, belief revision and conditional logic. In Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), pages 406--412, Sidney, August 1991. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc.  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....of beliefs, S, add OE to S while at the same time making only minimal modifications to S in order to maintain consistency. If holds in the resulting belief state then the counterfactual is true. Competing approaches under this paradigm include those in which beliefs are represented as models [3, 17, 44] and those in which beliefs are represented by formulas [8, 32, 21] An advantage of the former is insensitivity to the syntax of beliefs whereas the latter, because of its sensitivity to syntax, can support reason maintenance [32] The technical problems surrounding each approach involve which ....

Hirofumi Katsuno and Ken Satoh. A unified view of consequence relation, belief revision and conditional logic. In Proceedings of the Twelfth 21 International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 406--412, 1991.

....done, we reconsider the connections between belief revision and non monotonic reasoning from a conceptual perspective, and the special role played in this context by approaches that allow for reasoning from inconsistent premises. 4. 1 Preferential semantics for NMR and BR It is well known [Gar91, KS91, ACS92] that there is a close connection between belief revision and certain frameworks for non monotonic reasoning, specifically the preferential semantics first found in [McC81] and generalized in [Sho87] We recall the general framework here: Definition 4 Let be a (possibly total) preorder ....

....of [GM88] contrasted with those of observations 7 and 8) is evidence that a semantic approach such as presented above is a much better and natural way to understand the relation between BR and NMR. It is of course not the only way, as e.g. work on conditional logics also testifies (see e.g. KS91, ACS92, Bou92] though even in this area we see a move toward a more semantic view after an initial period prolific in complete axiomatizations. An equally direct connection exists between foundational (or even better, syntax based) revision and syntax based non monotonic reasoning, as in ....

Hirofumi Katsuno and Ken Satoh. A unified view of consequence relations, belief revision and conditional logic. In Proceedings of the Twelfth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 1991.

....satisfying ff. This has been formalized in several different ways ( 10] 1] 2] 3] 4] and its relations to standard modal logic and conditional logics investigated ( 2] 21] A general framework unifying defeasible consequence, belief revision and conditional logics has been proposed in [19]. For a discussion on the several faces of the minimality paradigm see [23] 1 To refer to a default true : ffi=ffi it is enough to specify only the formula ffi. We adopt this simplification. For our purposes we use the fact that the process of extending information given by axioms with ....

Hirofumi Katsuno and Ken Satoh. A unified view of consequence relation, belief revision and conditional logic. In IJCAI-91 - Proceedings of the 12th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 1, pages 406--412. Morgan Kaufman, 1991.

....We are certainly not the first to provide semantic models for belief revision and update. For example, AGM85, Gro88, GM88, Rot91, Bou92, Rij92] deal with revision and [KM91a, dVS92] deal with update. In fact, there are several works in the literature that capture both using the same machinery [KS91, GP92] and others that simulate belief revision using belief update [GMR92, dVS94] Our approach is different from most in that we did not construct a specific framework to capture one or both belief change paradigms. Instead, we start from a natural framework to model how an agent s knowledge changes ....

H. Katsuno and K. Satoh. A unified view of consequence relation, belief revision and conditional logic. In Proc. Twelfth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI '91), pages 406--412, 1991.

....such as Pearl s system Z ( 43] conditional logic ( 49] 31] and possibilistic logic ( 12] It is worth mentioning that orderings appear frequently in the literature of nonmonotonic logic. Orderings of models lead to the preferential model framework ( 48] 27] [25], 36] 11] while ordering of sentences lead to prioritization ( 14] 21] 5] Most nonmonotonic formalisms have been enriched with priority handling ( 32] 3] 9] However, it should be made clear that entrenchment relations are not prioritization. Priorities are extralogical orderings of ....

H. Katsuno and D. Satoh. A unified view of consequence relation, belief revision and conditional logic. In Proceedings of IJCAI-91, pages 406--412, Sydney, Australia, 1991.

....hold at the agent s initial state. We also characterize the class of all BCS s axiomatically in this language. We then investigate an important class of BCS s that we call preferential BCS s. This class can be viewed as an abstraction of the semantic models considered in papers such as [Gro88, KM91, Bou92, KS91]. Roughly speaking, a preferential BCS is a BCS where an epistemic state can be identified with a set of possible worlds , where a world is a complete truth assignment to L, together with a preference ordering on worlds. An agent believes in epistemic state s exactly if is true in all the ....

....examined a very abstract notion of belief change. The definition of BCS puts few restrictions on the belief change process and does not provide much insight into the structure of such processes. We now describe a more specific class of systems that has a semantic representation similar to that of [Gro88, KM91, Bou92, KS91]. The basic intuition is the following. We introduce possible worlds . Each possible world describes a way the world can be. We then associate with each epistemic set a set of possible worlds and a preference (or plausibility) ordering on worlds. The set of possible worlds associated with a state ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

H. Katsuno and K. Satoh. A unified view of consequence relation, belief revision and conditional logic. In Proc. Twelfth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI '91), pages 406--412, 1991.

....upper bound on jSub( j is the number of symbols in . Theorem 2.15: Let A be a subset of fCONS;NORM;REF;SDP;UNIF;RANKg. The formula is satisfiable in a Kripke structure satisfying A if and only if it is satisfiable in a Kripke structure with at most 2 jSub( j worlds. 7 As is well known [Bou94a, CL92, KS91], C1 C4, RC1 and RC2 are essentially an extension of the KLM properties discussed in Section 2.3 in the richer language L C : C1 corresponds to REF; C2 to AND; C3 to OR; C4 to CM; and RC1 and RC2 are identical to LLE and RW. They enforce essentially the same restrictions on the underlying ....

H. Katsuno and K. Satoh. A unified view of consequence relation, belief revision and conditional logic. In Proc. Twelfth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI '91), pages 406--412, 1991.

No context found.

Hirofumi Katsuno and Ken Satoh. A unified view of consequence relation, belief revision and conditional logic. In Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), pages 406--412, Sidney, August 1991. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc.

No context found.

Hirofumi Katsuno and Ken Satoh. A unified view of consequence relation, belief revision and conditional logic. In Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), pages 406--412, Sidney, August 1991. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc.

No context found.

Hirofumi Katsuno and Ken Satoh. A unified view of consequence relation, belief revision and conditional logic. In Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), pages 406--412, Sidney, August 1991. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc.

No context found.

H. Katsuno and K. Satoh. A unified view of consequence relation, belief revision and conditional logic. In Proc. Twelfth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI '91), pages 406--412, 1991.

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