A general framework for revising belief bases using qualitative jeffrey's rule

Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)

Volumn 5722 LNAI, Issue , 2009, Pages 612-621

  Benferhat, Salem ^a   Dubois, Didier ^b   Prade, Henri ^b   Williams, Mary Anne ^c  

^a UNIVERSITÉ D'ARTOIS   (France)

^b UNIVERSITÉ PAUL SABATIER   (France)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY SYDNEY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BELIEF REVISION; EPISTEMIC STATE; EXPRESSIVE POWER; KNOWLEDGE BASE; MODELING BELIEF; POSSIBILISTIC;

INTELLIGENT SYSTEMS; KNOWLEDGE BASED SYSTEMS;

INTELLIGENT AGENTS;

EID: 70349857960     PISSN: 03029743     EISSN: 16113349     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-04125-9_64     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (22)

1. Ben Amor, N., Benferhat, S., Dubois, D., Gefiner, H., Prade, H.: Independence in qualitative uncertainty frameworks. In: Seventh International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning KR2000, Breckenridge, Colorado, pp. 235-246. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (2000)
2. Benferhat, S., Dubois, D., Prade, H., Williams, M.-A.: A practical approach to revising prioritized knowledge bases. Studia Logica Journal 70, 105-130 (2002)
3. Benferhat, S., Konieczny, S., Papini, O., Pino Ṕerez, R.: Iterated revision by epistemic states: axioms, semantics and syntax. In: Proc. of the 14th European Conf. on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI 2000), Berlin, Allemagne, August 2000, pp. 13-17. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2000)
4. Boutilier, C.: Revision Sequences and Nested Conditionals. In: Proc. of the 13th Inter. Joint Conf. on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI 1993), pp. 519-531 (1993)
5. Chan, H., Darwiche, A.: On the revision of probabilistic beliefs using uncertain evidence. Artificial Intelligence 163, 67-90 (2005)
6. Darwiche, A., Pearl, J.: On the logic of iterated revision. Artificial Intelligence 89, 1-29 (1997)
7. Dubois, D., Prade, H.: Updating with belief functions, ordinal conditional functions and possibility measures. In: Bonissone, P.P., Henrion, M., Kanal, L.N., Lemmer, J.F. (eds.) Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence 6, pp. 311-329. Elsevier Science Publ. B.V., Amsterdam (1991)
8. Dubois, D., Prade, H.: A synthetic view of belief revision with uncertain inputs in the framework of possibility theory. Int. J. Approx. Reasoning 17, 295-324 (1997)
9. Dubois, D., Prade, H.: Possibility theory: qualitative and quantitative aspects. In: Gabbay, D., Smets, P. (eds.) Handbook of Defeasible Reasoning and Uncertainty Management Systems. Quantified Representation of Uncertainty and Imprecision, vol.1, pp. 169-226 (1998)
10. Dubois, D.: Three scenarios for the revision of epistemic states. J. Log. Comput. 18(5), 721-738 (2008)
11. Dubois, D., Fargier, H., Prade, H.: Ordinal and probabilistic representations of acceptance. J. Artif. Intell. Res. (JAIR) 22, 23-56 (2004)
12. Gärdenfors, P.: Knowledge in Flux: Modeling the Dynamics of Epistemic States. Bradford Books, MIT Press, Cambridge (1988)
13. Jefirey, R.C.: The logic of decision. Mc. Graw Hill, New York (1965)
14. Konieczny, S., Pino Ṕerez, R.: A framework for iterated revision. Journ. of Applied Non-Classical Logics 10(3-4) (2000)
15. Konieczny, S., Pino Perez, R.: Improvement operators. In: 11th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR 2008), pp. 177-186 (2008)
16. Makinson, D.: General patterns in nonmonotonic inference. In: Gabbay, D.M., Hogger, C.J., Robinson, J.A., Nute, D. (eds.) Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming, vol.3, pp. 35-110. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1994)
17. Nayak, A.: Iterated belief change based on epistemic entrenchment. Erkenntnis 41, 353-390 (1994)
18. Nebel, B.: Base revision operations and schemes: semantics, representation, and complexity. In: Proceedings of the Eleventh European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI 1994), pp. 341-345 (1994)
19. Papini, O.: Iterated revision operations stemming from the history of an agent's observations. Frontiers of Belief Revision (to appear, 2000)
20. Spohn, W.: Ordinal conditiona functions: a dynamic theory of epistemic states. Causation in Decision, Belief Change, and Statistics 2, 105-134 (1988)
21. Thielscher, M.: Handling implicational and universal quantification constraints in .ux. In: van Beek, P. (ed.) CP 2005. LNCS, vol.3709, pp. 667-681. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)
22. Williams, M.A.: Transmutations of Knowledge Systems. In: Doyle, J., et al. (eds.) Inter. Conf. on principles of Knowledge Representation and reasoning (KR 1994), pp. 619-629. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1994)