Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Mighty Belief Revision.Stephan Krämer - 2022 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 51 (5):1175-1213.
    Belief revision theories standardly endorse a principle of intensionality to the effect that ideal doxastic agents do not discriminate between pieces of information that are equivalent within classical logic. I argue that this principle should be rejected. Its failure, on my view, does not require failures of logical omniscience on the part of the agent, but results from a view of the update as _mighty_: as encoding what the agent learns might be the case, as well as what must be. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Approaching Truth in Conceptual Spaces.Gustavo Cevolani - 2020 - Erkenntnis 85 (6):1485-1500.
    Knowledge representation is a central issue in a number of areas, but few attempts are usually made to bridge different approaches accross different fields. As a contribution in this direction, in this paper I focus on one such approach, the theory of conceptual spaces developed within cognitive science, and explore its potential applications in the fields of philosophy of science and formal epistemology. My case-study is provided by the theory of truthlikeness, construed as closeness to “the whole truth” about a (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Safe Contraction Revisited.Hans Rott & Sven Ove Hansson - 2014 - In Sven Ove Hansson (ed.), David Makinson on Classical Methods for Non-Classical Problems (Outstanding Contributions to Logic, Vol. 3). Springer. pp. 35–70.
    Modern belief revision theory is based to a large extent on partial meet contraction that was introduced in the seminal article by Carlos Alchourrón, Peter Gärdenfors, and David Makinson that appeared in 1985. In the same year, Alchourrón and Makinson published a significantly different approach to the same problem, called safe contraction. Since then, safe contraction has received much less attention than partial meet contraction. The present paper summarizes the current state of knowledge on safe contraction, provides some new results (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • AGM 25 Years: Twenty-Five Years of Research in Belief Change.Eduardo Fermé & Sven Ove Hansson - 2011 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 40 (2):295-331.
    The 1985 paper by Carlos Alchourrón, Peter Gärdenfors, and David Makinson, “On the Logic of Theory Change: Partial Meet Contraction and Revision Functions” was the starting-point of a large and rapidly growing literature that employs formal models in the investigation of changes in belief states and databases. In this review, the first twenty-five years of this development are summarized. The topics covered include equivalent characterizations of AGM operations, extended representations of the belief states, change operators not included in the original (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   34 citations  
  • On AGM for Non-Classical Logics.Renata Wassermann - 2011 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 40 (2):271 - 294.
    The AGM theory of belief revision provides a formal framework to represent the dynamics of epistemic states. In this framework, the beliefs of the agent are usually represented as logical formulas while the change operations are constrained by rationality postulates. In the original proposal, the logic underlying the reasoning was supposed to be supraclassical, among other properties. In this paper, we present some of the existing work in adapting the AGM theory for non-classical logics and discuss their interconnections and what (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • The dynamics of relevance: adaptive belief revision.Peter Verdée & Frederik Van De Putte - 2012 - Synthese 187 (S1):1-42.
    This paper presents eight (previously unpublished) adaptive logics for belief revision, each of which define a belief revision operation in the sense of the AGM framework. All these revision operations are shown to satisfy the six basic AGM postulates for belief revision, and Parikh's axiom of Relevance. Using one of these logics as an example, we show how their proof theory gives a more dynamic flavor to belief revision than existing approaches. It is argued that this turns belief revision (that (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Lost in translation: Language independence in propositional logic – application to belief change.Pierre Marquis & Nicolas Schwind - 2014 - Artificial Intelligence 206 (C):1-24.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • David Makinson on Classical Methods for Non-Classical Problems.Sven Ove Hansson (ed.) - 2013 - Dordrecht, Netherland: Springer.
    The volume analyses and develops David Makinson’s efforts to make classical logic useful outside its most obvious application areas. The book contains chapters that analyse, appraise, or reshape Makinson’s work and chapters that develop themes emerging from his contributions. These are grouped into major areas to which Makinsons has made highly influential contributions and the volume in its entirety is divided into four sections, each devoted to a particular area of logic: belief change, uncertain reasoning, normative systems and the resources (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Independence — Revision and Defaults.Dov M. Gabbay & Karl Schlechta - 2009 - Studia Logica 92 (3):381-394.
    We investigate different aspects of independence here, in the context of theory revision, generalizing slightly work by Chopra, Parikh, and Rodrigues, and in the context of preferential reasoning.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark