Belief update revisited

IJCAI International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence

Volumn , Issue , 2007, Pages 2517-2522

  Lang, Jér̂ome ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ PAUL SABATIER   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

REASONING ABOUT ACTIONS;

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE;

EID: 84880865887     PISSN: 10450823     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (24)

1. C. Baral and Y. Zhang. Knowledge updates: Semantics and complexity issues. Artificial Intelligence, 164(1-2):209-243, 2005. (Pubitemid 40454434)
2. C. Boutilier. A unified model of qualitative belief change: a dynamical systems perspective. Artificial Intelligence, 1-2:281-316, 1998. (Pubitemid 128392782)
3. A. del Val and Y. Shoham. Deriving properties of belief update from theories of action. J. of Logic, Language, and Information, 3:81-119, 1994.
4. P. Doherty, W. Łukasziewicz, and E. Madalińska-Bugaj. The PMA and relativizing change for action update. In Proc. KR'98, pages 258-269.
5. F. Dupin de Saint-Cyr and J. Lang. Belief extrapolation (or how to reason about observations and unpredicted change). In Proc. KR2002, pages 497-508.
6. T. Eiter and G. Gottlob. On the complexity of propositional knowledge base revision, updates and counterfactuals. Artificial Intelligence, 57:227-270, 1992. (Pubitemid 23586698)
7. T. Eiter, E. Erdem, M. Fink, and J. Senko. Updating action domain descriptions. In Proc. IJCAI 2005, pages 418-423.
8. N. Friedman and J.Y. Halpern. Belief revision: A critique. In Proc. KR'96, pages 421-431.
9. N. Friedman and J.Y. Halpern. Modelling beliefs in dynamic systems. part ii: revision and update. JAIR, 10:117-167, 1999. (Pubitemid 30573912)
10. F. Giunchiglia, J. Lee, V. Lifschitz, N. Mc Cain, and H. Turner. Nonmonotonic causal theories. Artificial Intelligence, 2004.
11. A. Herzig. The PMA revisited. In Proceedings of KR'96, pages 40-50.
12. A. Herzig and O. Rifi. Propositional belief update and minimal change. Artificial Intelligence, 115:107-138, 1999. (Pubitemid 30522973)
13. A. Herzig, J. Lang, P. Marquis, and T. Polacsek. Actions, updates, and planning. In Procedings of IJCAI-01, pages 119-124.
14. A. Hunter and J. Delgrande. Iterated belief change: a transition system approach. In Proc. IJCAI05.
15. Y. Jin and M. Thielscher. Representing beliefs in the fluent calculus. In Proc. ECAI-04, pages 823-827.
16. H. Katsuno and A.O. Mendelzon. On the difference between updating a knowledge base and revising it. In Proc. KR'91, pages 387-394.
17. J. Lang, F. Lin, and P. Marquis. Causal theories of action: a computational core. In Proc. IJCAI-03, pages 1073-1078.
18. P. Liberatore. The complexity of belief update. Artificial Intelligence, 119:141-190, 2000.
19. P. Liberatore. A framework for belief update. In Proc. JELIA-2000.
20. H. Liu, C. Lutz, M. Milicic, and F. Wolter. Updating description logic aboxes. Proc. KR2006, 46-56.
21. P. Peppas, A. Nayak, M. Pagnucco, N. Foo, R. Kwok, and M. Prokopenko. Revision vs. update: taking a closer look. In Proc. ECAI96.
22. E. Sandewall. Features and Fluents. Oxford University Press, 1995.
23. S. Shapiro and M. Pagnucco. Iterated belief change and exogeneous actions in the situation calculus. In Proc. ECAI04.
24. M. Winslett. Updating Logical Databases. Cambridge University Press, 1990.