Parainconsistency of credibility-based belief states
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12775/LLP.2001.012Keywords
parainconsistency, credibility of information, belief stateAbstract
In our approach credibility of information plays an important role in modeling of both belief state and belief change [4]. It turns out that the credibility-based consequence operators used to define the notion of belief state tolerate inconsistency under some conditions.References
Alchourrón, C.E., P. Gärdenfors, and D. Makinson: “On the logic of theory change: Partial meet contraction and revision functions”, Journal of Symbolic Logic 50, 1985, 510–530.
Davey, B.A., and H.A. Priestley: Introduction to Lattices and Order, Cambridge University Press, 1990.
Fuhrmann, A.: “Theory contraction through base contraction”, Journal of Philosophical Logic 20, 1991, 175–203.
Gomolińska, A.: “Credibility of information for modelling belief state and its change”, Fundamenta Informaticæ 34, 1998, 33–51.
Gomolińska, A.: “On the logic of acceptance and rejection”, Studia Logica 60, 1998, 233–251.
Grahne, G., A.O. Mendelzon, and P.Z. Revesz: ”Knowledgebase transformations”. Proceedings of the 11th ACM SIGACT-SIGMOD-SIGART Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, 1992, 246–260.
Gärdenfors, P. (ed.): Belief Revision, Cambridge University Press, 1992.
Hansson, S.O.: Belief Base Dynamics, Doctoral Dissertation, Uppsala University, 1991.
Hansson, S.O., and W. Rabinowicz (eds.): Logic for a Change. Essays Dedicated to Sten Lindström on the Occasion of His Fiftieth Birthday, Uppsala Prints and Preprints in Philosophy 9, 1995.
Halpern, J.Y., and Y. Moses: “A guide to completeness and complexity for modal logics of knowledge and belief”, Artificial Intelligence 54, 1992, 319–379.
Hintikka, J.: Knowledge and Belief, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY, 1962.
Katsuno, H., and A.O. Mendelzon: “On the difference between updating a knowledge base and revising it”. [7], 183–203.
Marek, V., and M. Truszczyński: Nonmonotonic Logic, Springer-Verlag, 1993.
Moore, R.C.: “Semantical considerations on nonmonotonic logic”, Artificial Intelligence 25(1), 1985, 75–94.
Moore, R.C.: “Possible-world semantics for autoepistemic logic”. M.L. Ginsberg (ed.), Readings in Nonmonotonic Reasoning, Morgan Kaufmann, 1987, 137–142.
Nebel, B.: “Base revision operations and schemes: Semantics, representation, and complexity”. A. Cohn (ed.), Proceedings of the 11th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI 94), John Wiley and Sons, 1994, 341–345.
Priest, G., and R. Routley: “Introduction: Paraconsistent logics”, Studia Logica 43(1/2), 1984, 3–16.
Reiter, R.: “A logic for default reasoning”, Artificial Intelligence 13, 1980, 81–132.
Resher, N.: Plausible Reasoning. An Introduction to the Theory and Practice of Plausibilistic Inference, Van Gorcum, Assen, Amsterdam, 1976.
Schwarz, G.: “Autoepistemic modal logics”. R. Parikh (ed.), Proceedings of the 3rd Conference TARK (1990), Morgan Kaufmann, 1990, 97–109.
Segerberg, K.: “Some questions about hypertheories”. [9], 136–154.
Shafer, G.: A Mathematical Theory of Evidence, Princeton University Press, 1976.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Stats
Number of views and downloads: 512
Number of citations: 0
