Results 1 - 10
of
10
Revising Beliefs Received from Multiple Sources
, 1999
"... : Since the seminal, philosophical and influential works of Alchourr'on, Gardenfors and Makinson, ideas on "belief revision" have been progressively refined toward normative, effective and computable paradigms. Side by side to this "symbolic" line of research, there has been ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 17 (4 self)
- Add to MetaCart
: Since the seminal, philosophical and influential works of Alchourr'on, Gardenfors and Makinson, ideas on "belief revision" have been progressively refined toward normative, effective and computable paradigms. Side by side to this "symbolic" line of research, there has been also a "numerical" approach to belief revision whose main contributes were the probabilistic and the evidence-based approaches. The opinion expressed in this paper is that, to be applied in a multi-sources environment, belief revision has to depart considerably from the original framework. In particular, it has to abandon the fundamental principle of "Priority to the Incoming Information" in preference to what we called the principle of "Recoverability". Furthermore the semantic approach should be blended with a syntactic treatment of consistency inspired by the Truth Maintenance Systems. 1 A BRIEF RETROSPECTIVE 1.1 The AGM paradigm During the last decade, the logical framework layed down by Alchourr'on, Gardenf...
Belief Revision: From Theory To Practice
, 1996
"... Belief revision is the process of rearranging a knowledge base to preserve global consistency while accomodating incoming information. Early approaches to belief revision used symbolic model-theoretic, considering the problem as one of changing a logical theory. More recent approaches have adopted q ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 11 (5 self)
- Add to MetaCart
Belief revision is the process of rearranging a knowledge base to preserve global consistency while accomodating incoming information. Early approaches to belief revision used symbolic model-theoretic, considering the problem as one of changing a logical theory. More recent approaches have adopted qualitative syntactic methods, taking them into the area of "truth maintenance systems", and numerical mathematical methods, thus moving into the mainstream literature of uncertainty management. Multi-agent systems, in which information may come from a variety of human or artificial sources with different degrees of reliability, seem to be a natural domain for belief revision. The aim of this paper is to give a synoptic perspective of this composite subject from the clear air of the high theoretical peaks down to the muddy plain of practical algorithms.
Maximal Consistency, Theory of Evidence and Bayesian Conditioning in the Investigative Domain
, 1996
"... this paper which is organized as follows. Section 2 introduces the model for belief revision in a multi-source environment that is the core of both, the old and the new ISS. Section 3 presents the BeliefFunction Formalism and the Bayesian Conditioning as applied in this multi-sources environment. Se ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 7 (3 self)
- Add to MetaCart
this paper which is organized as follows. Section 2 introduces the model for belief revision in a multi-source environment that is the core of both, the old and the new ISS. Section 3 presents the BeliefFunction Formalism and the Bayesian Conditioning as applied in this multi-sources environment. Section 4 illustrates the new ISS discussing the relevance of these ideas in the inquiry domain. Section 5 contains an example and section 6 discusses merits and limits of ISS. 2 A Model for Belief Revision in a Multi-Source Environment
Belief Revision under Uncertainty in a Multi Agent Environment
- Advanced Concepts, Techniques and Applications
, 1997
"... Introduction The body of beliefs (facts and rules) accumulated in the course of time by a knowledge-based system interacting with a complex and dynamic world is destined to evolve. Some of the newcoming pieces of information integrate and corroborate the previously held corpus of sentences about th ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 4 (0 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Introduction The body of beliefs (facts and rules) accumulated in the course of time by a knowledge-based system interacting with a complex and dynamic world is destined to evolve. Some of the newcoming pieces of information integrate and corroborate the previously held corpus of sentences about the world, but others might cause serious conflicts with the established knowledge. In this case, the eventual acquisition of the new evidence should be accompanied by a partial or total reduction of the credibility of the conflicting pieces of knowledge. If the system's collection of beliefs is not a flat set of facts but contains rules, finding such conflicts and determining all the sentences involved in the contradictions can be hard because knowledge is only partially explicit. Since the seminal, influential and philosophical work of Alchourrn, Grdenfors and Makinson [1], the ideas on "belief revision" have been progressively refined [2,3] and ameliorated toward normative, effective and q
Distributed Belief Revision as Applied Within a Descriptive Model of Jury Deliberations
- Peterson, Nissan and Barnden (infra). Also: Pre-proceedings of the AISB 2000 Symposium on AI and Legal Reasoning
, 2000
"... this paper. ..."
(Show Context)
A lattice-theoretic interpretation of independence of frames
"... Summary. In this paper we discuss the nature of independence of sources in the theory of evidence from an algebraic point of view, starting from the analogy with the case of projective geometries. Independence in Dempster’s rule is equivalent to independence of frames as Boolean algebras. Collection ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 1 (0 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Summary. In this paper we discuss the nature of independence of sources in the theory of evidence from an algebraic point of view, starting from the analogy with the case of projective geometries. Independence in Dempster’s rule is equivalent to independence of frames as Boolean algebras. Collection of frames, though, can be interpreted as semi-modular lattices on which independence can be defined in several different forms. We prove those forms to be distinct but related to Boolean independence, as a step towards a more general definition of this fundamental notion. Key words: Dempster’s rule, frames, semi-modular lattice, independence. 1
The notion of independence in the theory of evidence: An algebraic study
, 2007
"... In this paper we discuss the nature of independence of sources in the theory of evidence from an algebraic point of view, starting from an analogy with projective geometries. Independence in Dempster’s rule is equivalent to independence of frames as Boolean algebras. Collection of frames, in turn, c ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 1 (1 self)
- Add to MetaCart
In this paper we discuss the nature of independence of sources in the theory of evidence from an algebraic point of view, starting from an analogy with projective geometries. Independence in Dempster’s rule is equivalent to independence of frames as Boolean algebras. Collection of frames, in turn, can be given several algebraic interpretations in terms of semimodular lattices, matroids, and geometric lattices. Each of those structures are endowed with a particular notion of independence, which we prove to be distinct even though related to independence of frames. We show that the latter is in fact opposed to classical linear independence, giving collection of frames the structure of “anti-matroids”.
Distributed Knowledge Elicitation through the Dempster-Shafer theory of Evidence: a simulation study
"... This paper reports the results of an experiment carried on MASSIM, a specific multi-agent simulation testbed. There are two files, one containing true propositions and the other containing their correspective negations. Five agents in turn access one of these files. Each agent has a "capacity&q ..."
Abstract
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
This paper reports the results of an experiment carried on MASSIM, a specific multi-agent simulation testbed. There are two files, one containing true propositions and the other containing their correspective negations. Five agents in turn access one of these files. Each agent has a "capacity" that will be used as the frequency with which the agent accesses the file with the correct knowledge. Agents randomly exchange information with the others. Since they have limited degrees of capacity, their knowledge bases quickly become inconsistent. Each agent is equipped with the same belief revision mechanism to detect and solve these contradictions. This embodies the Dempster-Shafer theory of evidence to evaluate the credibility of the various pieces of information and estimate the reliability of the other agents. In this way, the agents learn from the others and about the others' trustworthiness and capability. We call this global process "Distributed Knowledge Elicitation". The purpose of...
Belief Revision in a Multi-Agent environment Recoverability vs. Priority to the Incoming Information
"... this paper is that, to be applied in a multi-sources environment, belief revision has to depart considerably from the original framework. In particular, it has to abandon the fundamental principle of "Priority to the Incoming Information" in force of what we called the principle of "R ..."
Abstract
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
this paper is that, to be applied in a multi-sources environment, belief revision has to depart considerably from the original framework. In particular, it has to abandon the fundamental principle of "Priority to the Incoming Information" in force of what we called the principle of "Recoverability". A BRIEF RETROSPECTIVE Alchourrón , Gärdenfors and Makinson [1] introduced three rational principles to whom belief revision should obey: P1. Consistency: belief revision must yield a consistent knowledge space P2. Minimal Change: belief revision should alter as little as possible the knowledge space P3. Priority to the Incoming Information: incoming information always belongs to the revised knowledge space They conceived the knowledge space K as a deductively closed set of sentences of a propositional language L. From P1÷P3 they drew up eight postulates for the revision K
