zbMATH — the first resource for mathematics

Propositional knowledge base revision and minimal change. (English) Zbl 0792.68182
Summary: The semantics of revising knowledge bases represented by sets of propositional sentences is analyzed from a model-theoretic point of view. A characterization of all revision schemes that satisfy the Gärdenfors rationality postulates is given in terms of minimal changes with respect to an ordering among interpretations. Revision methods proposed by various authors are surveyed and analyzed in this framework. The correspondences between Gärdenfors-like rationality postulates and minimal changes with respect to other orderings are also investigated.

68T35 Theory of languages and software systems (knowledge-based systems, expert systems, etc.) for artificial intelligence
68T30 Knowledge representation
Full Text: DOI
[1] Alchourrón, C.E.; Gärdenfors, P.; Makinson, D., On the logic of theory change: partial meet contraction and revision functions, J. symbolic logic, 50, 510-530, (1985) · Zbl 0578.03011
[2] Bell, J., The logic of nonmonotonicity, Artif. intell., 41, 365-374, (1990)
[3] Borgida, A., Language features for flexible handling of exceptions in information systems, ACM trans. database syst., 10, 563-603, (1985)
[4] Dalal, M., Updates in propositional databases, ()
[5] Dalal, M., Investigations into a theory of knowledge base revision: preliminary report, (), 475-479
[6] Fagin, R.; Ullman, J.D.; Vardi, M.Y., On the semantics of updates in databases, (), 352-365
[7] Kraus, S.; Lehmann, D.; Magidor, M., Nonmonotonic reasoning, preferential models and cumulative logics, Artif. intell., 44, 167-207, (1990) · Zbl 0782.03012
[8] Gärdenfors, P., Conditionals and changes of belief, Acta philos. fenn., 30, 381-404, (1978) · Zbl 0413.03011
[9] Gärdenfors, P., Epistemic importance and minimal changes of belief, Australasian J. philos., 62, 136-157, (1984)
[10] Gärdenfors, P., Knowledge in flux: modeling the dynamics of epistemic states, () · Zbl 1229.03008
[11] P. Gärdenfors, The dynamics of belief systems: foundations vs. coherence theories, Revue Int. Philos. (to appear).
[12] Gärdenfors, P.; Makinson, D., Revisions of knowledge systems using epistemic entrenchment, (), 83-95 · Zbl 0711.03009
[13] Grove, A., Two modellings for theory change, J. philos. logic, 17, 157-170, (1988) · Zbl 0639.03025
[14] Katsuno, H.; Mendelzon, A.O., A unified view of propositional knowledge base updates, (), 1413-1419
[15] Katsuno, H.; Mendelzon, A.O., On the difference between updating a knowledge base and revising it, (), 387-394 · Zbl 0765.68197
[16] Lehmann, D., What does a conditional knowledge base entail?, (), 212-222 · Zbl 0709.68104
[17] Reiter, R., On integrity constraints, (), 97-111
[18] Satoh, K., Nonmonotonic reasoning by minimal belief revision, (), 455-462
[19] K. Satoh, Private communication (1990).
[20] K. Satoh, H. Katsuno and A.O. Mendelzon (in preparation).
[21] Weber, A., Updating propositional formulas, (), 487-500
[22] Winslett, M., Reasoning about action using a possible models approach, (), 89-93
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. It attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming the completeness or perfect precision of the matching.