Switch to: Citations

Add references

You must login to add references.
  1. Theory contraction and base contraction unified.Sven Ove Hansson - 1993 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 58 (2):602-625.
    One way to construct a contraction operator for a theory (belief set) is to assign to it a base (belief base) and an operator of partial meet contraction for that base. Axiomatic characterizations are given of the theory contractions that are generated in this way by (various types of) partial meet base contractions.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   37 citations  
  • On the logic of theory change: Contraction functions and their associated revision functions.Carlos E. Alchourron & David Makinson - 1982 - Theoria 48 (1):14-37.
    A study in the logic of theory change, examining the properties of maxichoice contraction and revision operations.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   109 citations  
  • On the logic of theory change: Contraction functions and their associated revision functions.Carlos E. Alchourrón - 1982 - Theoria 48 (1):14-37.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   40 citations  
  • On the status of the postulate of recovery in the logic of theory change.David Makinson - 1987 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 16 (4):383 - 394.
    Describes and discusses the rather special behaviour of one of the postulates in the AGM account of theory change.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   72 citations  
  • Belief contraction without recovery.Sven Ove Hansson - 1991 - Studia Logica 50 (2):251 - 260.
    The postulate of recovery is commonly regarded to be the intuitively least compelling of the six basic Gärdenfors postulates for belief contraction. We replace recovery by the seemingly much weaker postulate of core-retainment, which ensures that if x is excluded from K when p is contracted, then x plays some role for the fact that K implies p. Surprisingly enough, core-retainment together with four of the other Gärdenfors postulates implies recovery for logically closed belief sets. Reasonable contraction operators without recovery (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   61 citations  
  • (1 other version)On the logic of theory change: Partial meet contraction and revision functions.Carlos E. Alchourrón, Peter Gärdenfors & David Makinson - 1985 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 50 (2):510-530.
    This paper extends earlier work by its authors on formal aspects of the processes of contracting a theory to eliminate a proposition and revising a theory to introduce a proposition. In the course of the earlier work, Gardenfors developed general postulates of a more or less equational nature for such processes, whilst Alchourron and Makinson studied the particular case of contraction functions that are maximal, in the sense of yielding a maximal subset of the theory (or alternatively, of one of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   746 citations  
  • In defense of base contraction.Sven Ove Hansson - 1992 - Synthese 91 (3):239 - 245.
    In the most common approaches to belief dynamics, states of belief are represented by sets that are closed under logical consequence. In an alternative approach, they are represented by non-closed belief bases. This representation has attractive properties not shared by closed representations. Most importantly, it can account for repeated belief changes that have not yet been satisfactorily accounted for in the closed approach.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   29 citations  
  • Belief Contraction in the Context of the General Theory of Rational Choice.Hans Rott - 1993 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 59 (4):1426-1450.
    This paper reorganizes and further develops the theory of partial meet contraction which was introduced in a classic paper by Alchourron, Gardenfors, and Makinson. Our purpose is threefold. First, we put the theory in a broader perspective by decomposing it into two layers which can respectively be treated by the general theory of choice and preference and elementary model theory. Second, we reprove the two main representation theorems of AGM and present two more representation results for the finite case that (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   39 citations  
  • Theory contraction through base contraction.André Fuhrmann - 1991 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 20 (2):175 - 203.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   93 citations  
  • New operators for theory change.Sven Ove Hansson - 1989 - Theoria 55 (2):114.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   40 citations  
  • Knowledge in Flux. Modelling the Dymanics of Epistemic States.P. Gärdenfors - 1988 - MIT Press.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   255 citations  
  • Reasoning about action I.Matthew L. Ginsberg & David E. Smith - 1988 - Artificial Intelligence 35 (2):165-195.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   23 citations  
  • Reversing the Levi identity.Sven Ove Hansson - 1993 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 22 (6):637 - 669.
    The AGM (Alchourrón-Gärdenfors-Makinson) model of belief change is extended to cover changes on sets of beliefs that are not closed under logical consequence (belief bases). Three major types of change operations, namely contraction, internal revision, and external revision are axiomatically characterized, and their interrelations are studied. In external revision, the Levi identity is reversed in the sense that one first adds the new belief to the belief base, and afterwards contracts its negation. It is argued that external revision represents an (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   61 citations  
  • Modellings for belief change: Prioritization and entrenchment.Hans Rott - 1992 - Theoria 58 (1):21-57.
    We distinguish the set of explicit beliefs of a reasoner, his "belief base", from the beliefs that are merely implicit. Syntax-based belief change governed by the structure of the belief base and the ranking ("prioritization") of its elements is reconstructed with the help of an epistemic entrenchment relation in the style of Gärdenfors and Makinson. Though priorities are essentially different from entrenchments, distinguished relations of epistemic entrenchment may be obtained from prioritized belief bases by a number of different constructions. An (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   17 citations  
  • New operators for theory change.Svenove Hansson - 1989 - Theoria 55 (2):114-132.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   51 citations  
  • Foundational belief change.Abhaya C. Nayak - 1994 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 23 (5):495 - 533.
    This paper is concerned with the construction of a base contraction (revision) operation such that the theory contraction (revision) operation generated by it will be fully AGM-rational. It is shown that the theory contraction operation generated by Fuhrmann's minimal base contraction operation, even under quite strong restrictions, fails to satisfy the "supplementary postulates" of belief contraction. Finally Fuhrmann's construction is appropriately modified so as to yield the desired properties. The new construction may be described as involving a modification of safe (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   23 citations