Iterated belief change: a transition system approach

Authors:
Aaron Hunter;James P. Delgrande
Affiliations:
School of Computing Science, Faculty of Applied Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, Canada;School of Computing Science, Faculty of Applied Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, Canada
Venue:
IJCAI'05 Proceedings of the 19th international joint conference on Artificial intelligence
Year:
2005

Citing 3
Cited 7

On the logic of iterated belief revision

Artificial Intelligence
Descriptions of Game Actions

Journal of Logic, Language and Information
Generalized update: belief change in dynamic settings

IJCAI'95 Proceedings of the 14th international joint conference on Artificial intelligence - Volume 2

Belief change in the context of fallible actions and observations

AAAI'06 Proceedings of the 21st national conference on Artificial intelligence - Volume 1
Belief change and cryptographic protocol verification

AAAI'07 Proceedings of the 22nd national conference on Artificial intelligence - Volume 1
An action description language for iterated belief change

IJCAI'07 Proceedings of the 20th international joint conference on Artifical intelligence
Belief update revisited

IJCAI'07 Proceedings of the 20th international joint conference on Artifical intelligence
Using answer sets to solve belief change problems

LPNMR'07 Proceedings of the 9th international conference on Logic programming and nonmonotonic reasoning
A conceptual agent model based on a uniform approach to various belief operations

KI'09 Proceedings of the 32nd annual German conference on Advances in artificial intelligence
Iterated belief change due to actions and observations

Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.00

Visualization

Abstract

We use a transition system approach to reason about the evolution of an agent's beliefs as actions are executed. Some actions cause an agent to perform belief revision and some actions cause an agent to perform belief update, but the interaction between revision and update can be non-elementary. We present a set of basic postulates describing the interaction of revision and update, and we introduce a new belief evolution operator that gives a plausible interpretation to alternating sequences of revisions and updates.