AGM Contraction and Revision of Rules

Journal of Logic, Language and Information 25 (3-4):273-297 (2016)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In this paper we study AGM contraction and revision of rules using input/output logical theories. We replace propositional formulas in the AGM framework of theory change by pairs of propositional formulas, representing the rule based character of theories, and we replace the classical consequence operator Cn by an input/output logic. The results in this paper suggest that, in general, results from belief base dynamics can be transferred to rule base dynamics, but that a similar transfer of AGM theory change to rule change is much more problematic. First, we generalise belief base contraction to rule base contraction, and show that two representation results of Hansson still hold for rule base contraction. Second, we show that the six so-called basic postulates of AGM contraction are consistent only for some input/output logics, but not for others. In particular, we show that the notorious recovery postulate can be satisfied only by basic output, but not by simple-minded output. Third, we show how AGM rule revision can be defined in terms of AGM rule contraction using the Levi identity. We highlight various topics for further research.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Foundational belief change.Abhaya C. Nayak - 1994 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 23 (5):495 - 533.
Changes of disjunctively closed bases.Sven Ove Hansson - 1993 - Journal of Logic, Language and Information 2 (4):255-284.
Repertoire Contraction.Sven Ove Hansson - 2013 - Journal of Logic, Language and Information 22 (1):1-21.
Coherentist Contraction.Sven Ove Hansson - 2000 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 29 (3):315 - 330.
Resource-bounded belief revision and contraction.Mark Jago - 2006 - In P. Torroni, U. Endriss, M. Baldoni & A. Omicini (eds.), Declarative Agent Languages and Technologies III. Springer. pp. 141--154.
A survey of multiple contractions.André Fuhrmann & Sven Ove Hansson - 1994 - Journal of Logic, Language and Information 3 (1):39-75.

Analytics

Added to PP
2016-10-23

Downloads
21 (#718,251)

6 months
12 (#200,125)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Gabriella Pigozzi
Université Paris Dauphine

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Two modellings for theory change.Adam Grove - 1988 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 17 (2):157-170.
Belief revision.Hans Rott - 2008 - In Jonathan Eric Adler & Lance J. Rips (eds.), Reasoning: Studies of Human Inference and its Foundations. Cambridge University Press. pp. 514--534.
Input/output logics.David Makinson & Leendert van der Torre - 2000 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 29 (4):383-408.

View all 12 references / Add more references