In memory of Jasu Magan Bhana Panchia (1963–1991): Iterated Belief Revision in Dynamic Doxastic Logic

2011 ◽  
pp. 217-227
Author(s):  
Krister Segerberg
2010 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 228-246 ◽  
Author(s):  
KRISTER SEGERBERG

The success of the AGM paradigm—the theory of belief change initiated by Alchourrón, Gärdenfors, and Makinson—is remarkable, as even a quick look at the literature it has generated will testify. But it is also remarkable, at least in hindsight, how limited was the original effort. For example, the theory concerns the beliefs of just one agent; all incoming information is accepted; belief change is uniquely determined by the new information; there is no provision for nested beliefs. And perhaps most surprising: there is no analysis of iterated change.In this paper it is that last restriction that is at issue. Our medium of study is dynamic doxastic logic (DDL). The success of the AGM paradigm The particular contribution of the paper is detailed completeness proofs for three dynamic doxastic logics of iterated belief revision.The problem of extending the AGM paradigm to include iterated change has been discussed for years, but systematic discussions have appeared only recently (see Segerberg, 2007 and forthcoming, but also van Benthem, 2007; Rott, 2006; Zvesper, 2007).


Studia Logica ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sena Bozdag

AbstractI propose a novel hyperintensional semantics for belief revision and a corresponding system of dynamic doxastic logic. The main goal of the framework is to reduce some of the idealisations that are common in the belief revision literature and in dynamic epistemic logic. The models of the new framework are primarily based on potentially incomplete or inconsistent collections of information, represented by situations in a situation space. I propose that by shifting the representational focus of doxastic models from belief sets to collections of information, and by defining changes of beliefs as artifacts of changes of information, we can achieve a more realistic account of belief representation and belief change. The proposed dynamic operation suggests a non-classical way of changing beliefs: belief revision occurs in non-explosive environments which allow for a non-monotonic and hyperintensional belief dynamics. A logic that is sound with respect to the semantics is also provided.


1997 ◽  
Vol 89 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 1-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adnan Darwiche ◽  
Judea Pearl

2014 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 598-612 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thanuka L. Wickramarathne ◽  
Kamal Premaratne ◽  
Manohar N. Murthi ◽  
Nitesh V. Chawla

2006 ◽  
Vol 26 ◽  
pp. 127-151 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Booth ◽  
T. Meyer

As partial justification of their framework for iterated belief revision Darwiche and Pearl convincingly argued against Boutilier's natural revision and provided a prototypical revision operator that fits into their scheme. We show that the Darwiche-Pearl arguments lead naturally to the acceptance of a smaller class of operators which we refer to as admissible. Admissible revision ensures that the penultimate input is not ignored completely, thereby eliminating natural revision, but includes the Darwiche-Pearl operator, Nayak's lexicographic revision operator, and a newly introduced operator called restrained revision. We demonstrate that restrained revision is the most conservative of admissible revision operators, effecting as few changes as possible, while lexicographic revision is the least conservative, and point out that restrained revision can also be viewed as a composite operator, consisting of natural revision preceded by an application of a "backwards revision" operator previously studied by Papini. Finally, we propose the establishment of a principled approach for choosing an appropriate revision operator in different contexts and discuss future work.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document