Eligible Contraction

Studia Logica 73 (2):167-182 (2003)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

When a belief set is contracted only some beliefs are eligible for removal. By introducing eligibility for removal as a new semantic primitive for contraction and combining it with epistemic entrenchment we get a contraction operator with a number of interesting properties. By placing some minimal constraint upon eligibility we get an explicit contraction recipe that exactly characterises the so called interpolation thesis, a thesis that states upper and lower bounds for the amount of information to be given up in contraction. As a result we drop the controversial property of recovery. By placing additional constraints on eligibility we get representation theorems for a number of contraction operators of varying strength. In addition it is shown that recovery contraction is a special case that we get if eligibility is explicitly constructed in terms of logical relevance.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,891

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

Expansion and contraction of finite states.Allard Tamminga - 2004 - Studia Logica 76 (3):427-442.
Comparative Possibility in Set Contraction.Pavlos Peppas - 2012 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 41 (1):53-75.
A Brief Note About Rott Contraction.E. Fermé & R. Rodriguez - 1998 - Logic Journal of the IGPL 6 (6):835-842.
Bootstrap Contraction.Sven Ove Hansson - 2013 - Studia Logica 101 (5):1013-1029.
Belief contraction without recovery.Sven Ove Hansson - 1991 - Studia Logica 50 (2):251 - 260.
Semi-Contraction: Axioms and Construction.Eduardo Fermé & Ricardo Rodriguez - 1998 - Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 39 (3):332-345.
Iterated Contraction Based on Indistinguishability.Konstantinos Georgatos - 2013 - In Sergei Artemov & Anil Nerode (eds.), LFCS 2013. Springer. pp. 194–205.
Connectification forn-contraction.Andreja Prijatelj - 1995 - Studia Logica 54 (2):149 - 171.
AGM Contraction and Revision of Rules.Roland Mühlenbernd, Laurent Perrussel & Emiliano Lorini - 2016 - Journal of Logic, Language and Information 25 (3 - 4):273-297.
AGM Contraction and Revision of Rules.Guido Boella, Gabriella Pigozzi & Leendert van der Torre - 2016 - Journal of Logic, Language and Information 25 (3-4):273-297.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
21 (#727,964)

6 months
13 (#277,191)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

John Cantwell
Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm

References found in this work

On the logic of iterated belief revision.Adnan Darwiche & Judea Pearl - 1997 - Artificial Intelligence 89 (1-2):1-29.
Preferential belief change using generalized epistemic entrenchment.Hans Rott - 1992 - Journal of Logic, Language and Information 1 (1):45-78.
Changes of disjunctively closed bases.Sven Ove Hansson - 1993 - Journal of Logic, Language and Information 2 (4):255-284.
Belief Revision and Relevance.Peter Gardenfors - 1990 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1990:349 - 365.

Add more references