Several forms of iterable belief change exist, differing in the kind of change and its strength: some operators introduce formulae, others remove them; some add formulae unconditionally, others only as additions to the previous beliefs; some only relative to the current situation, others in all possible cases. A sequence of changes may involve several of them: for example, the first step is a revision, the second a contraction and the third a refinement of the previous beliefs. The ten operators considered in this article are shown to be all reducible to three: lexicographic revision, refinement and severe withdrawal. In turn, these three can be expressed in terms of lexicographic revision at the cost of restructuring the sequence. This restructuring needs not to be done explicitly: an algorithm that works on the original sequence is shown. The complexity of mixed sequences of belief change operators is also analyzed. Most of them require only a polynomial number of calls to a satisfiability checker, some are even easier.
La Trobe University（乐卓博大学）；Cardiff University（卡迪夫大学）
Recent work has considered the problem of extending to the case of iterated belief change the so-called `Harper Identity' (HI), which defines single-shot contraction in terms of single-shot revision. The present paper considers the prospects of providing a similar extension of the Levi Identity (LI), in which the direction of definition runs the other way. We restrict our attention here to the three classic iterated revision operators--natural, restrained and lexicographic, for which we provide here the first collective characterisation in the literature, under the appellation of `elementary' …
On Definite Iterated Belief Revision with Belief Algebras
School of Mathematics, Southwest Jiaotong University, China（数学学院，西南交通大学）；School of Computing and Artificial Intelligence, Southwest Jiaotong University, China（计算与人工智能学院，西南交通大学）；LIRMM UMR 5506, University of Montpellier & CNRS, France（蒙彼利埃大学及CNRS LIRMM研究中心）
The field of iterated belief change has focused mainly on revision, with the other main operator of AGM belief change theory, i.e. contraction, receiving relatively little attention. In this paper we extend the Harper Identity from single-step change to define iterated contraction in terms of iterated revision. Specifically, just as the Harper Identity provides a recipe for defining the belief set resulting from contracting A in terms of (i) the initial belief set and (ii) the belief set resulting from revision by not-A, we look at ways to define the plausibility ordering over worlds resulting…
FernUniversität in Hagen（哈根开放大学）；Technical University Dortmund（多特蒙德工业大学）
According to Boutillier, Darwiche, Pearl and others, principles for iterated revision can be characterised in terms of changing beliefs about conditionals. For iterated contraction a similar formulation is not known. This is especially because for iterated belief change the connection between revision and contraction via the Levi and Harper identity is not straightforward, and therefore, characterisation results do not transfer easily between iterated revision and contraction. In this article, we develop an axiomatisation of iterated contraction in terms of changing conditional beliefs. We pro…
Institute of Information Systems (IFIS)（信息系统研究所（IFIS））；University of Lübeck（吕贝克大学）
Iterated applications of belief change operators are essential for different scenarios such as that of ontology evolution where new information is not presented at once but only in piecemeal fashion within a sequence. I discuss iterated applications of so called reinterpretation operators that trace conflicts between ontologies back to the ambiguous of symbols and that provide conflict resolution strategies with bridging axioms. The discussion centers on adaptations of the classical iteration postulates according to Darwiche and Pearl. The main result of the paper is that reinterpretation oper…
Iterated Belief Change is the research area that investigates principles for the dynamics of beliefs over (possibly unlimited) many subsequent belief changes. In this paper, we demonstrate how iterated belief change is connected to computation. In particular, we show that iterative belief revision is Turing complete, even under the condition that broadly accepted principles like the Darwiche-Pearl postulates for iterated revision hold.
Darwiche and Pearl's seminal 1997 article outlined a number of baseline principles for a logic of iterated belief revision. These principles, the DP postulates, have been supplemented in a number of alternative ways. Most of the suggestions made have resulted in a form of `reductionism' that identifies belief states with orderings of worlds. However, this position has recently been criticised as being unacceptably strong. Other proposals, such as the popular principle (P), aka `Independence', characteristic of `admissible' revision operators, remain commendably more modest. In this paper, we s…
AGM's belief revision is one of the main paradigms in the study of belief change operations. In this context, belief bases (prioritised bases) have been largely used to specify the agent's belief state - whether representing the agent's `explicit beliefs' or as a computational model for her belief state. While the connection of iterated AGM-like operations and their encoding in dynamic epistemic logics have been studied before, few works considered how well-known postulates from iterated belief revision theory can be characterised by means of belief bases and their counterpart in a dynamic epi…
British Columbia Institute of Technology（不列颠哥伦比亚理工学院）；Simon Fraser University（西蒙菲莎大学）
In action domains where agents may have erroneous beliefs, reasoning about the effects of actions involves reasoning about belief change. In this paper, we use a transition system approach to reason about the evolution of an agents beliefs as actions are executed. Some actions cause an agent to perform belief revision while others cause an agent to perform belief update, but the interaction between revision and update can be non-elementary. We present a set of rationality properties describing the interaction between revision and update, and we introduce a new class of belief change operators …
While research on iterated revision is predominant in the field of iterated belief change, the class of iterated contraction operators received more attention in recent years. In this article, we examine a non-prioritized generalisation of iterated contraction. In particular, the class of weak decrement operators is introduced, which are operators that by multiple steps achieve the same as a contraction. Inspired by Darwiche and Pearl's work on iterated revision the subclass of decrement operators is defined. For both, decrement and weak decrement operators, postulates are presented and for ea…
Mahasarakham University（马哈沙拉堪大学）；National ICT Australia（澳大利亚国家信息与通信技术研究院）；University of New South Wales（新南威尔士大学）
As partial justification of their framework for iterated belief revision Darwiche and Pearl convincingly argued against Boutiliers 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, Nayaks lexicographic revision operator, and a newly introduced operator cal…
La Trobe University（拉筹伯大学）；Cardiff University（卡迪夫大学）
The belief revision literature has largely focussed on the issue of how to revise one's beliefs in the light of information regarding matters of fact. Here we turn to an important but comparatively neglected issue: How might one extend a revision operator to handle conditionals as input? Our approach to this question of 'conditional revision' is distinctive insofar as it abstracts from the controversial details of how to revise by factual sentences. We introduce a 'plug and play' method for uniquely extending any iterated belief revision operator to the conditional case. The flexibility of our…
We propose a variant of iterated belief revision designed for settings with limited computational resources, such as mobile autonomous robots. The proposed memory architecture---called the {\em universal memory architecture} (UMA)---maintains an epistemic state in the form of a system of default rules similar to those studied by Pearl and by Goldszmidt and Pearl (systems $Z$ and $Z^+$). A duality between the category of UMA representations and the category of the corresponding model spaces, extending the Sageev-Roller duality between discrete poc sets and discrete median algebras provides a tw…
University of Maryland（马里兰大学）；Tilburg University（蒂尔堡大学）；Carnegie Mellon University（卡内基梅隆大学）；Groningen University（格罗宁根大学）
In this extended abstract, we carefully examine a purported counterexample to a postulate of iterated belief revision. We suggest that the example is better seen as a failure to apply the theory of belief revision in sufficient detail. The main contribution is conceptual aiming at the literature on the philosophical foundations of the AGM theory of belief revision [1]. Our discussion is centered around the observation that it is often unclear whether a specific example is a "genuine" counterexample to an abstract theory or a misapplication of that theory to a concrete case.
Institute of Mathematics and Statistics, Federal University of Bahia - UFBA（巴伊亚联邦大学数学与统计学院）
AGM's belief revision is one of the main paradigms in the study of belief change operations. In this context, belief bases (prioritised bases) have been primarily used to specify the agent's belief state. While the connection of iterated AGM-like operations and their encoding in dynamic epistemic logics have been studied before, few works considered how well-known postulates from iterated belief revision theory can be characterised by means of belief bases and their counterpart in dynamic epistemic logic. Particularly, it has been shown that some postulates can be characterised through transfo…
Federal University of Bahia（巴伊亚联邦大学）；Pontifical Catholic University of Rio Grande do Sul（南里奥格兰德天主教大学）；Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul（南里奥格兰德联邦大学）
AGM's belief revision is one of the main paradigms in the study of belief change operations. Recently, several logics for belief and information change have been proposed in the literature and used to encode belief change operations in rich and expressive semantic frameworks. While the connections of AGM-like operations and their encoding in dynamic doxastic logics have been studied before by the work of Segerberg, most works on the area of Dynamic Epistemic Logics (DEL) have not, to our knowledge, attempted to use those logics as tools to investigate mathematical properties of belief change o…
Traditional approaches to non-monotonic reasoning fail to satisfy a number of plausible axioms for belief revision and suffer from conceptual difficulties as well. Recent work on ranked preferential models (RPMs) promises to overcome some of these difficulties. Here we show that RPMs are not adequate to handle iterated belief change. Specifically, we show that RPMs do not always allow for the reversibility of belief change. This result indicates the need for numerical strengths of belief.
Situation calculus has been applied widely in artificial intelligence to model and reason about actions and changes in dynamic systems. Since actions carried out by agents will cause constant changes of the agents' beliefs, how to manage these changes is a very important issue. Shapiro et al. [22] is one of the studies that considered this issue. However, in this framework, the problem of noisy sensing, which often presents in real-world applications, is not considered. As a consequence, noisy sensing actions in this framework will lead to an agent facing inconsistent situation and subsequentl…
When Tools Hurt LLM Reasoning: State-Dependent Belief Revision under External Evidence
Shanghai Artificial Intelligence Laboratory（上海人工智能实验室）；Tsinghua University（清华大学）；Beijing National Research Center for Information Science and Technology（北京信息科学与技术国家研究中心）；Monash University（莫纳什大学）；Tencent Hunyuan（腾讯混元）
Robots assisting humans in complex domains have to represent knowledge and reason at both the sensorimotor level and the social level. The architecture described in this paper couples the non-monotonic logical reasoning capabilities of a declarative language with probabilistic belief revision, enabling robots to represent and reason with qualitative and quantitative descriptions of knowledge and degrees of belief. Specifically, incomplete domain knowledge, including information that holds in all but a few exceptional situations, is represented as a Answer Set Prolog (ASP) program. The answer s…
