Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-559fc8cf4f-qpj69 Total loading time: 0.268 Render date: 2021-02-25T11:11:34.413Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true }

EPISTEMIC ENTRENCHMENT-BASED MULTIPLE CONTRACTIONS

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 May 2013

EDUARDO FERMÉ
Affiliation:
Centro de Ciências Exactas e da Engenharia,Universidade da Madeira and Centre for Artificial Intelligence (CENTRIA), Universidade Nova de Lisboa
MAURÍCIO D. L. REIS
Affiliation:
Centro de Ciências Exactas e da Engenharia,Universidade da Madeira and Centre for Artificial Intelligence (CENTRIA), Universidade Nova de Lisboa
Corresponding
E-mail address:

Abstract

In this article we present a new class of multiple contraction functions—the epistemic entrenchment-based multiple contractions—which are a generalization of the epistemic entrenchment-based contractions (Gärdenfors, 1988; Gärdenfors & Makinson, 1988) to the case of contractions by (possibly nonsingleton) sets of sentences and provide an axiomatic characterization for that class of functions. Moreover, we show that the class of epistemic entrenchment-based multiple contractions coincides with the class of system of spheres-based multiple contractions introduced in Fermé & Reis (2012).

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

References

Alchourrón, C., Gärdenfors, P., & Makinson, D. (1985). On the logic of theory change: Partial meet contraction and revision functions. Journal of Symbolic Logic, 50, 510530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alchourrón, C., & Makinson, D. (1981). Hierarchies of regulations and their logic. In Hilpinen, R., editor. New Studies in Deontic Logic: Norms, Actions, and the Foundations of Ethics. Dordrecht, Holland: D. Reidel Publishing Company, pp. 125148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alchourrón, C., & Makinson, D. (1985). On the logic of theory change: Safe contraction. Studia Logica, 44, 405422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fermé, E., & Reis, M. (2012). System of spheres-based multiple contractions. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 41, 2952.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fermé, E., Saez, K., & Sanz, P. (2003). Multiple kernel contraction. Studia Logica, 73, 183195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foo, N. Y. (1990). Observations on AGM entrenchment. Technical report 389, University of Sydney, Basser Department of Computer Science.
Fuhrmann, A. (1991). Theory contraction through base contraction. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 20, 175203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fuhrmann, A., & Hansson, S. O. (1994). A survey of multiple contraction. Journal of Logic, Language and Information, 3, 3974.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gärdenfors, P. (1988). Knowledge in Flux: Modeling the Dynamics of Epistemic States. Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Gärdenfors, P., & Makinson, D. (1988). Revisions of knowledge systems using epistemic entrenchment. In Vardi, M. Y., editor. Proceedings of the Second Conference on Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning About Knowledge. Los Altos, CA: Morgan Kaufmann, pp. 8395.Google Scholar
Gärdenfors, P., & Rott, H. (1995). Belief revision. In Gabbay, D. M., Hogger, C. J., and Robinson, J. A., editors. Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming, Volume 4, Epistemic and Temporal Reasoning. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, pp. 35132.Google Scholar
Grove, A. (1988). Two modellings for theory change. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 17, 157170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hansson, S. O. (1989). New operators for theory change. Theoria, 55, 114132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hansson, S. O. (1991). Belief Base Dynamics. PhD thesis, Uppsala University.Google Scholar
Hansson, S. O. (1992). A dyadic representation of belief. In Gärdenfors, P., editor. Belief Revision, Number 29 in Cambridge Tracts in Theoretical Computer Science. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 89121.Google Scholar
Hansson, S. O. (1994). Kernel contraction. Journal of Symbolic Logic, 59, 845859.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hansson, S. O. (1999). A Textbook of Belief Dynamics. Theory Change and Database Updating, Volume 11 of Applied Logic Series. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Hansson, S. O. (2010). Multiple and iterated contraction reduced to single-step single-sentence contraction. Synthese, 173, 153177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Niederée, R. (1991). Multiple contraction: A further case against Gärdenfors’ principle of recovery. In Fuhrmann, A., and Morreau, M., editors. The Logic of Theory Change. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, pp. 322334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peppas, P., & Williams, M.-A. (1995, Winter). Constructive modelings for theory change. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, 36(1), 120133.Google Scholar
Reis, M., & Fermé, E. (2012). Possible worlds semantics for partial meet multiple contraction. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 41, 728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reis, M. D. L. (2011, May). On Theory Multiple Contraction. PhD thesis, Universidade da Madeira. http://hdl.handle.net/10400.13/255.Google Scholar
Spohn, W. (2010). Multiple contraction revisited. In Suárez, M., Dorato, M., and Rédei, M., editors. EPSA Epistemology and Methodology of Science. The Netherlands: Springer, pp. 279288.Google Scholar

Full text views

Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 28 *
View data table for this chart

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 25th February 2021. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

EPISTEMIC ENTRENCHMENT-BASED MULTIPLE CONTRACTIONS
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

EPISTEMIC ENTRENCHMENT-BASED MULTIPLE CONTRACTIONS
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

EPISTEMIC ENTRENCHMENT-BASED MULTIPLE CONTRACTIONS
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *