Prolegomena to Dynamic Logic for Belief Revision
In 'belief revision' a theory K is revised with a formula φ resulting in a revised theory K * φ. Typically, ¬φ is in K, one has to give up belief in ¬φ by a process of retraction, and φ is in K * φ. We propose to model belief revision in a dynamic epistemic logic. In this setting, we typic...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Synthese (Dordrecht) 2005-11, Vol.147 (2), p.229-275 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 275 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 229 |
container_title | Synthese (Dordrecht) |
container_volume | 147 |
creator | Van Ditmarsch, Hans P. |
description | In 'belief revision' a theory K is revised with a formula φ resulting in a revised theory K * φ. Typically, ¬φ is in K, one has to give up belief in ¬φ by a process of retraction, and φ is in K * φ. We propose to model belief revision in a dynamic epistemic logic. In this setting, we typically have an information state (pointed Kripke model) for the theory K wherein the agent believes the negation of the revision formula, i.e., wherein B¬φ is true. The revision with φ is a program *φ that transforms this information state into a new information state. The transformation is described by a dynamic modal operator [*φ], that is interpreted as a binary relation ⟦*φ⟧ between information states. The next information state is computed from the current information state and the belief revision formula. If the revision is successful, the agent believes φ in the resulting state, i.e., Bφ is then true. To make this work, as information states we propose 'doxastic epistemic models' that represent both knowledge and degrees of belief. These are multi-modal and multi-agent Kripke models. They are constructed from preference relations for agents, and they satisfy various characterizable multi-agent frame properties. Iterated, revocable, and higher-order belief revision are all quite natural in this setting. We present, for an example, five different ways of such dynamic belief revision. One can also see that as a non-deterministic epistemic action with two alternatives, where one is preferred over the other, and there is a natural generalization to general epistemic actions with preferences. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s11229-005-1349-7 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_196703385</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>20118658</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>20118658</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c324t-dfd495a0350fbac42e486f7f55b492ab97ee01c2afa8d5961557249520c9635f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpFkEtLAzEQx4MoWKsfwIOwCB6jk_fmqK0vKCii55CmSdmy3dRkK_Tbm7JFLzMw_8fAD6FLArcEQN1lQijVGEBgwrjG6giNiFAMg5b8GI0AWDnWQp2is5xXAIRIDiME7ym2fhnXvrNVH6vprrPrxlWzuCwzxFQ9-LbxofrwP01uYneOToJts7847DH6enr8nLzg2dvz6-R-hh2jvMeLsOBaWGACwtw6Tj2vZVBBiDnX1M618h6IozbYeiG0JEIoWhIUnJZMBDZG10PvJsXvrc-9WcVt6spLQ7RUwFgtiokMJpdizskHs0nN2qadIWD2XMzAxRQuZs_FqJK5ORTb7Gwbku1ck_-DioOgoi6-q8G3yn1Mfzot5GpZ9F-sumod</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>196703385</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Prolegomena to Dynamic Logic for Belief Revision</title><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><source>Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals</source><creator>Van Ditmarsch, Hans P.</creator><creatorcontrib>Van Ditmarsch, Hans P.</creatorcontrib><description>In 'belief revision' a theory K is revised with a formula φ resulting in a revised theory K * φ. Typically, ¬φ is in K, one has to give up belief in ¬φ by a process of retraction, and φ is in K * φ. We propose to model belief revision in a dynamic epistemic logic. In this setting, we typically have an information state (pointed Kripke model) for the theory K wherein the agent believes the negation of the revision formula, i.e., wherein B¬φ is true. The revision with φ is a program *φ that transforms this information state into a new information state. The transformation is described by a dynamic modal operator [*φ], that is interpreted as a binary relation ⟦*φ⟧ between information states. The next information state is computed from the current information state and the belief revision formula. If the revision is successful, the agent believes φ in the resulting state, i.e., Bφ is then true. To make this work, as information states we propose 'doxastic epistemic models' that represent both knowledge and degrees of belief. These are multi-modal and multi-agent Kripke models. They are constructed from preference relations for agents, and they satisfy various characterizable multi-agent frame properties. Iterated, revocable, and higher-order belief revision are all quite natural in this setting. We present, for an example, five different ways of such dynamic belief revision. One can also see that as a non-deterministic epistemic action with two alternatives, where one is preferred over the other, and there is a natural generalization to general epistemic actions with preferences.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0039-7857</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-0964</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s11229-005-1349-7</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Dordrecht: Springer</publisher><subject>Accessibility relation ; Atoms ; Belief ; Communication ; Computer science ; Dynamic logic ; Economic models ; Epistemology ; Epistemology. Philosophy of science. Theory of knowledge ; Knowledge ; Language ; Logic ; Logical postulates ; Mathematical functions ; Model theory ; Philosophy ; Preferences ; Reasoning ; Semantics ; Theory</subject><ispartof>Synthese (Dordrecht), 2005-11, Vol.147 (2), p.229-275</ispartof><rights>Copyright 2005 Springer</rights><rights>2008 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Springer 2005</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c324t-dfd495a0350fbac42e486f7f55b492ab97ee01c2afa8d5961557249520c9635f3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c324t-dfd495a0350fbac42e486f7f55b492ab97ee01c2afa8d5961557249520c9635f3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/20118658$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/20118658$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>309,310,314,776,780,785,786,799,23909,23910,25118,27901,27902,57992,58225</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=17405258$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Van Ditmarsch, Hans P.</creatorcontrib><title>Prolegomena to Dynamic Logic for Belief Revision</title><title>Synthese (Dordrecht)</title><description>In 'belief revision' a theory K is revised with a formula φ resulting in a revised theory K * φ. Typically, ¬φ is in K, one has to give up belief in ¬φ by a process of retraction, and φ is in K * φ. We propose to model belief revision in a dynamic epistemic logic. In this setting, we typically have an information state (pointed Kripke model) for the theory K wherein the agent believes the negation of the revision formula, i.e., wherein B¬φ is true. The revision with φ is a program *φ that transforms this information state into a new information state. The transformation is described by a dynamic modal operator [*φ], that is interpreted as a binary relation ⟦*φ⟧ between information states. The next information state is computed from the current information state and the belief revision formula. If the revision is successful, the agent believes φ in the resulting state, i.e., Bφ is then true. To make this work, as information states we propose 'doxastic epistemic models' that represent both knowledge and degrees of belief. These are multi-modal and multi-agent Kripke models. They are constructed from preference relations for agents, and they satisfy various characterizable multi-agent frame properties. Iterated, revocable, and higher-order belief revision are all quite natural in this setting. We present, for an example, five different ways of such dynamic belief revision. One can also see that as a non-deterministic epistemic action with two alternatives, where one is preferred over the other, and there is a natural generalization to general epistemic actions with preferences.</description><subject>Accessibility relation</subject><subject>Atoms</subject><subject>Belief</subject><subject>Communication</subject><subject>Computer science</subject><subject>Dynamic logic</subject><subject>Economic models</subject><subject>Epistemology</subject><subject>Epistemology. Philosophy of science. Theory of knowledge</subject><subject>Knowledge</subject><subject>Language</subject><subject>Logic</subject><subject>Logical postulates</subject><subject>Mathematical functions</subject><subject>Model theory</subject><subject>Philosophy</subject><subject>Preferences</subject><subject>Reasoning</subject><subject>Semantics</subject><subject>Theory</subject><issn>0039-7857</issn><issn>1573-0964</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2005</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>AVQMV</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>K50</sourceid><sourceid>M1D</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNpFkEtLAzEQx4MoWKsfwIOwCB6jk_fmqK0vKCii55CmSdmy3dRkK_Tbm7JFLzMw_8fAD6FLArcEQN1lQijVGEBgwrjG6giNiFAMg5b8GI0AWDnWQp2is5xXAIRIDiME7ym2fhnXvrNVH6vprrPrxlWzuCwzxFQ9-LbxofrwP01uYneOToJts7847DH6enr8nLzg2dvz6-R-hh2jvMeLsOBaWGACwtw6Tj2vZVBBiDnX1M618h6IozbYeiG0JEIoWhIUnJZMBDZG10PvJsXvrc-9WcVt6spLQ7RUwFgtiokMJpdizskHs0nN2qadIWD2XMzAxRQuZs_FqJK5ORTb7Gwbku1ck_-DioOgoi6-q8G3yn1Mfzot5GpZ9F-sumod</recordid><startdate>20051101</startdate><enddate>20051101</enddate><creator>Van Ditmarsch, Hans P.</creator><general>Springer</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>AABKS</scope><scope>ABSDQ</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AIMQZ</scope><scope>AVQMV</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>GB0</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>K50</scope><scope>LIQON</scope><scope>M1D</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20051101</creationdate><title>Prolegomena to Dynamic Logic for Belief Revision</title><author>Van Ditmarsch, Hans P.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c324t-dfd495a0350fbac42e486f7f55b492ab97ee01c2afa8d5961557249520c9635f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2005</creationdate><topic>Accessibility relation</topic><topic>Atoms</topic><topic>Belief</topic><topic>Communication</topic><topic>Computer science</topic><topic>Dynamic logic</topic><topic>Economic models</topic><topic>Epistemology</topic><topic>Epistemology. Philosophy of science. Theory of knowledge</topic><topic>Knowledge</topic><topic>Language</topic><topic>Logic</topic><topic>Logical postulates</topic><topic>Mathematical functions</topic><topic>Model theory</topic><topic>Philosophy</topic><topic>Preferences</topic><topic>Reasoning</topic><topic>Semantics</topic><topic>Theory</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Van Ditmarsch, Hans P.</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Philosophy Collection</collection><collection>Philosophy Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest One Literature</collection><collection>Arts Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>DELNET Social Sciences & Humanities Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>Art, Design & Architecture Collection</collection><collection>One Literature (ProQuest)</collection><collection>Arts & Humanities Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Synthese (Dordrecht)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Van Ditmarsch, Hans P.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Prolegomena to Dynamic Logic for Belief Revision</atitle><jtitle>Synthese (Dordrecht)</jtitle><date>2005-11-01</date><risdate>2005</risdate><volume>147</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>229</spage><epage>275</epage><pages>229-275</pages><issn>0039-7857</issn><eissn>1573-0964</eissn><abstract>In 'belief revision' a theory K is revised with a formula φ resulting in a revised theory K * φ. Typically, ¬φ is in K, one has to give up belief in ¬φ by a process of retraction, and φ is in K * φ. We propose to model belief revision in a dynamic epistemic logic. In this setting, we typically have an information state (pointed Kripke model) for the theory K wherein the agent believes the negation of the revision formula, i.e., wherein B¬φ is true. The revision with φ is a program *φ that transforms this information state into a new information state. The transformation is described by a dynamic modal operator [*φ], that is interpreted as a binary relation ⟦*φ⟧ between information states. The next information state is computed from the current information state and the belief revision formula. If the revision is successful, the agent believes φ in the resulting state, i.e., Bφ is then true. To make this work, as information states we propose 'doxastic epistemic models' that represent both knowledge and degrees of belief. These are multi-modal and multi-agent Kripke models. They are constructed from preference relations for agents, and they satisfy various characterizable multi-agent frame properties. Iterated, revocable, and higher-order belief revision are all quite natural in this setting. We present, for an example, five different ways of such dynamic belief revision. One can also see that as a non-deterministic epistemic action with two alternatives, where one is preferred over the other, and there is a natural generalization to general epistemic actions with preferences.</abstract><cop>Dordrecht</cop><pub>Springer</pub><doi>10.1007/s11229-005-1349-7</doi><tpages>47</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0039-7857 |
ispartof | Synthese (Dordrecht), 2005-11, Vol.147 (2), p.229-275 |
issn | 0039-7857 1573-0964 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_196703385 |
source | Jstor Complete Legacy; Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals |
subjects | Accessibility relation Atoms Belief Communication Computer science Dynamic logic Economic models Epistemology Epistemology. Philosophy of science. Theory of knowledge Knowledge Language Logic Logical postulates Mathematical functions Model theory Philosophy Preferences Reasoning Semantics Theory |
title | Prolegomena to Dynamic Logic for Belief Revision |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-14T11%3A51%3A44IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Prolegomena%20to%20Dynamic%20Logic%20for%20Belief%20Revision&rft.jtitle=Synthese%20(Dordrecht)&rft.au=Van%20Ditmarsch,%20Hans%20P.&rft.date=2005-11-01&rft.volume=147&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=229&rft.epage=275&rft.pages=229-275&rft.issn=0039-7857&rft.eissn=1573-0964&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s11229-005-1349-7&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E20118658%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=196703385&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=20118658&rfr_iscdi=true |