Resource-Bounded Belief Revision and Contraction
Agents need to be able to change their beliefs; in particular, they should be able to contract or remove a certain belief in order to restore consistency to their set of beliefs, and revise their beliefs by incorporating a new belief which may be inconsistent with their previous beliefs. An influent...
Gespeichert in:
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
---|---|
Format: | Tagungsbericht |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 154 |
---|---|
container_issue | |
container_start_page | 141 |
container_title | |
container_volume | |
creator | Alechina, Natasha Jago, Mark Logan, Brian |
description | Agents need to be able to change their beliefs; in particular, they should be able to contract or remove a certain belief in order to restore consistency to their set of beliefs, and revise their beliefs by incorporating a new belief which may be inconsistent with their previous beliefs. An influential theory of belief change proposed by Alchourron, Gärdenfors and Makinson (AGM) [1] describes postulates which rational belief revision and contraction operations should satisfy. The AGM postulates are usually taken as characterising idealised rational reasoners, and the corresponding belief change operations are considered unsuitable for implementable agents due to their high computational cost [2]. The main result of this paper is to show that an efficient (linear time) belief contraction operation nevertheless satisfies all but one of the AGM postulates for contraction. This contraction operation is defined for an implementable rule-based agent which can be seen as a reasoner in a very weak logic; although the agent’s beliefs are deductively closed with respect to this logic, checking consistency and tracing dependencies between beliefs is not computationally expensive. Finally, we give a non-standard definition of belief revision in terms of contraction for our agent. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/11691792_9 |
format | Conference Proceeding |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>pascalfrancis_sprin</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pascalfrancis_primary_20039907</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>20039907</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-p218t-baa8f15ffc6f5ac73449e7a3f4c001f4f88eb8e857867031178af5b967f76b0f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpFkM1Lw0AQxdcvsNZe_AtyEbxEZ7Kbnd2jLX5BQSh6XjbbHYnGJGRbwf--kQqdy2N4P4Z5T4grhFsEoDtEbZFs4eyRuJClAikRiI7FBDViLqWyJwdD21MxAQlFbknJczFL6RPGkUhYwkTAKqZuO4SYz7ttu47rbB6bOnK2ij91qrs28-06W3TtZvBhM-6X4ox9k-LsX6fi_fHhbfGcL1-fXhb3y7wv0GzyynvDWDIHzaUPJJWykbxkFQCQFRsTKxNNSUbT-A2S8VxWVhOTroDlVFzv7_Y-Bd_w4NtQJ9cP9bcffl0xRrAWaORu9lwarfYjDq7quq_kENxfXe5Ql9wBddBWUg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Index Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>conference_proceeding</recordtype></control><display><type>conference_proceeding</type><title>Resource-Bounded Belief Revision and Contraction</title><source>Springer Books</source><creator>Alechina, Natasha ; Jago, Mark ; Logan, Brian</creator><contributor>Torroni, Paolo ; Omicini, Andrea ; Baldoni, Matteo ; Endriss, Ulle</contributor><creatorcontrib>Alechina, Natasha ; Jago, Mark ; Logan, Brian ; Torroni, Paolo ; Omicini, Andrea ; Baldoni, Matteo ; Endriss, Ulle</creatorcontrib><description>Agents need to be able to change their beliefs; in particular, they should be able to contract or remove a certain belief in order to restore consistency to their set of beliefs, and revise their beliefs by incorporating a new belief which may be inconsistent with their previous beliefs. An influential theory of belief change proposed by Alchourron, Gärdenfors and Makinson (AGM) [1] describes postulates which rational belief revision and contraction operations should satisfy. The AGM postulates are usually taken as characterising idealised rational reasoners, and the corresponding belief change operations are considered unsuitable for implementable agents due to their high computational cost [2]. The main result of this paper is to show that an efficient (linear time) belief contraction operation nevertheless satisfies all but one of the AGM postulates for contraction. This contraction operation is defined for an implementable rule-based agent which can be seen as a reasoner in a very weak logic; although the agent’s beliefs are deductively closed with respect to this logic, checking consistency and tracing dependencies between beliefs is not computationally expensive. Finally, we give a non-standard definition of belief revision in terms of contraction for our agent.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0302-9743</identifier><identifier>ISBN: 3540331069</identifier><identifier>ISBN: 9783540331063</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1611-3349</identifier><identifier>EISBN: 3540331077</identifier><identifier>EISBN: 9783540331070</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/11691792_9</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg</publisher><subject>Applied sciences ; Artificial intelligence ; Belief Revision ; Computer science; control theory; systems ; Contraction Operation ; Exact sciences and technology ; Programming languages ; Revision Operator ; Rule Instance ; Software ; Work Memory</subject><ispartof>Declarative Agent Languages and Technologies III, 2006, p.141-154</ispartof><rights>Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006</rights><rights>2008 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/11691792_9$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/11691792_9$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>309,310,779,780,784,789,790,793,4048,4049,27924,38254,41441,42510</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=20039907$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><contributor>Torroni, Paolo</contributor><contributor>Omicini, Andrea</contributor><contributor>Baldoni, Matteo</contributor><contributor>Endriss, Ulle</contributor><creatorcontrib>Alechina, Natasha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jago, Mark</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Logan, Brian</creatorcontrib><title>Resource-Bounded Belief Revision and Contraction</title><title>Declarative Agent Languages and Technologies III</title><description>Agents need to be able to change their beliefs; in particular, they should be able to contract or remove a certain belief in order to restore consistency to their set of beliefs, and revise their beliefs by incorporating a new belief which may be inconsistent with their previous beliefs. An influential theory of belief change proposed by Alchourron, Gärdenfors and Makinson (AGM) [1] describes postulates which rational belief revision and contraction operations should satisfy. The AGM postulates are usually taken as characterising idealised rational reasoners, and the corresponding belief change operations are considered unsuitable for implementable agents due to their high computational cost [2]. The main result of this paper is to show that an efficient (linear time) belief contraction operation nevertheless satisfies all but one of the AGM postulates for contraction. This contraction operation is defined for an implementable rule-based agent which can be seen as a reasoner in a very weak logic; although the agent’s beliefs are deductively closed with respect to this logic, checking consistency and tracing dependencies between beliefs is not computationally expensive. Finally, we give a non-standard definition of belief revision in terms of contraction for our agent.</description><subject>Applied sciences</subject><subject>Artificial intelligence</subject><subject>Belief Revision</subject><subject>Computer science; control theory; systems</subject><subject>Contraction Operation</subject><subject>Exact sciences and technology</subject><subject>Programming languages</subject><subject>Revision Operator</subject><subject>Rule Instance</subject><subject>Software</subject><subject>Work Memory</subject><issn>0302-9743</issn><issn>1611-3349</issn><isbn>3540331069</isbn><isbn>9783540331063</isbn><isbn>3540331077</isbn><isbn>9783540331070</isbn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>conference_proceeding</rsrctype><creationdate>2006</creationdate><recordtype>conference_proceeding</recordtype><recordid>eNpFkM1Lw0AQxdcvsNZe_AtyEbxEZ7Kbnd2jLX5BQSh6XjbbHYnGJGRbwf--kQqdy2N4P4Z5T4grhFsEoDtEbZFs4eyRuJClAikRiI7FBDViLqWyJwdD21MxAQlFbknJczFL6RPGkUhYwkTAKqZuO4SYz7ttu47rbB6bOnK2ij91qrs28-06W3TtZvBhM-6X4ox9k-LsX6fi_fHhbfGcL1-fXhb3y7wv0GzyynvDWDIHzaUPJJWykbxkFQCQFRsTKxNNSUbT-A2S8VxWVhOTroDlVFzv7_Y-Bd_w4NtQJ9cP9bcffl0xRrAWaORu9lwarfYjDq7quq_kENxfXe5Ql9wBddBWUg</recordid><startdate>2006</startdate><enddate>2006</enddate><creator>Alechina, Natasha</creator><creator>Jago, Mark</creator><creator>Logan, Brian</creator><general>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</general><general>Springer</general><scope>IQODW</scope></search><sort><creationdate>2006</creationdate><title>Resource-Bounded Belief Revision and Contraction</title><author>Alechina, Natasha ; Jago, Mark ; Logan, Brian</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-p218t-baa8f15ffc6f5ac73449e7a3f4c001f4f88eb8e857867031178af5b967f76b0f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>conference_proceedings</rsrctype><prefilter>conference_proceedings</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2006</creationdate><topic>Applied sciences</topic><topic>Artificial intelligence</topic><topic>Belief Revision</topic><topic>Computer science; control theory; systems</topic><topic>Contraction Operation</topic><topic>Exact sciences and technology</topic><topic>Programming languages</topic><topic>Revision Operator</topic><topic>Rule Instance</topic><topic>Software</topic><topic>Work Memory</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Alechina, Natasha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jago, Mark</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Logan, Brian</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Alechina, Natasha</au><au>Jago, Mark</au><au>Logan, Brian</au><au>Torroni, Paolo</au><au>Omicini, Andrea</au><au>Baldoni, Matteo</au><au>Endriss, Ulle</au><format>book</format><genre>proceeding</genre><ristype>CONF</ristype><atitle>Resource-Bounded Belief Revision and Contraction</atitle><btitle>Declarative Agent Languages and Technologies III</btitle><date>2006</date><risdate>2006</risdate><spage>141</spage><epage>154</epage><pages>141-154</pages><issn>0302-9743</issn><eissn>1611-3349</eissn><isbn>3540331069</isbn><isbn>9783540331063</isbn><eisbn>3540331077</eisbn><eisbn>9783540331070</eisbn><abstract>Agents need to be able to change their beliefs; in particular, they should be able to contract or remove a certain belief in order to restore consistency to their set of beliefs, and revise their beliefs by incorporating a new belief which may be inconsistent with their previous beliefs. An influential theory of belief change proposed by Alchourron, Gärdenfors and Makinson (AGM) [1] describes postulates which rational belief revision and contraction operations should satisfy. The AGM postulates are usually taken as characterising idealised rational reasoners, and the corresponding belief change operations are considered unsuitable for implementable agents due to their high computational cost [2]. The main result of this paper is to show that an efficient (linear time) belief contraction operation nevertheless satisfies all but one of the AGM postulates for contraction. This contraction operation is defined for an implementable rule-based agent which can be seen as a reasoner in a very weak logic; although the agent’s beliefs are deductively closed with respect to this logic, checking consistency and tracing dependencies between beliefs is not computationally expensive. Finally, we give a non-standard definition of belief revision in terms of contraction for our agent.</abstract><cop>Berlin, Heidelberg</cop><pub>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</pub><doi>10.1007/11691792_9</doi><tpages>14</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0302-9743 |
ispartof | Declarative Agent Languages and Technologies III, 2006, p.141-154 |
issn | 0302-9743 1611-3349 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pascalfrancis_primary_20039907 |
source | Springer Books |
subjects | Applied sciences Artificial intelligence Belief Revision Computer science control theory systems Contraction Operation Exact sciences and technology Programming languages Revision Operator Rule Instance Software Work Memory |
title | Resource-Bounded Belief Revision and Contraction |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-13T07%3A13%3A17IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-pascalfrancis_sprin&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=proceeding&rft.atitle=Resource-Bounded%20Belief%20Revision%20and%20Contraction&rft.btitle=Declarative%20Agent%20Languages%20and%20Technologies%20III&rft.au=Alechina,%20Natasha&rft.date=2006&rft.spage=141&rft.epage=154&rft.pages=141-154&rft.issn=0302-9743&rft.eissn=1611-3349&rft.isbn=3540331069&rft.isbn_list=9783540331063&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/11691792_9&rft_dat=%3Cpascalfrancis_sprin%3E20039907%3C/pascalfrancis_sprin%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft.eisbn=3540331077&rft.eisbn_list=9783540331070&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |