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...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Hauptverfasser: Alechina, Natasha, Jago, Mark, Logan, Brian
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&amp;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