Full Text (Final Version)
Acknowledgments
xi
1. Introduction
1
1.1 Organization of the Thesis
2
1.2 Notation and Preliminaries
3
2. Resource-Bounded Agents
5
2.1 Change in View
6
2.2 Minimal Rationality
10
2.3 Do the Right Thing
13
2.4 Doxastic Performance
13
2.5 Doing the Right Revision?
16
3. The AGM Paradigm
19
3.1 Postulates
20
3.2 Constructions
22
3.3 Shortcomings
26
3.4 Alternatives and Refinements
27
3.4.1 Belief Bases
27
3.4.2 Non-Prioritized Belief
Revision
35
4. Resource-bounded Belief Change
39
4.1 Belief States
39
4.2 Basic Operations
45
4.3 Embedding AGM Theory
48
4.4 Harman's Principles
51
4.5 Refining the Model
52
5. Local Change
59
5.1 Defining Compartments and Local Inference
61
5.1.1 Defining Compartments
61
5.1.2 Defining Local Inference
64
5.2 The Generalized Belief Revision Operators
67
5.2.1 Contraction
68
5.2.2 Consolidation
70
5.2.3 External and Internal
Revision
71
5.2.4 Semi-Revision
74
5.2.5 Levi and Harper Identities
75
5.2.6 Local Operators
75
5.3 Related Work
76
5.3.1 Compartments and Frames
of Mind
76
5.3.2 Paraconsistent Logic
77
5.3.3 Relevance Logic
78
5.4 Embedding Local Change
79
5.5 Conclusions
81
6. Structured Bases
83
6.1 RABIT
84
6.2 Structuring the Belief Base
86
6.3 Where Does the Structure Come from?
90
6.3.1 The Syntactic Approach
91
6.3.2 The Database Approach
92
6.3.3 The Logical Approach
92
6.3.4 The Hybrid Approach
93
6.4 Computational Aspects
94
6.5 Related Work
95
6.6 Conclusion
98
7. Local Diagnosis
99
7.1 Reiter Diagnosis
100
7.1.1 Basic Definitions
100
7.1.2 Computing Diagnoses
101
7.2 Diagnosis via Kernel Semi-Revision
102
7.3 Using System Structure
105
7.4 Local Kernel Diagnosis
106
7.5 Computing Kernel Operations
109
7.5.1 Reiter's Algorithm
109
7.5.2 An Algorithm for Kernel
Semi-Revision
111
7.5.3 Applying the Algorithm
to Local Operations 112
7.6 Related Work
112
7.6.1 Approximate Diagnosis
112
7.6.2 Assumption-Based Truth
Maintenance Systems 114
7.7 Conclusion
114
8. Discussion and Future Work
115
A. Full Acceptance Via Argumentation
119
A.1 Argumentation
120
A.2 Using Argumentation for Accepting Beliefs
121
A.3 Example
122
A.4 Discussion
125
B. Proofs related to Chapter 4
127
C. Proofs related to Chapter 5
131
Bibliography
149
Samenvatting
157
The problem of belief revision
has been extensively studied during the last
twenty years. Given an agent
with a set of (ascribed) beliefs, how should he
change his beliefs when confronted
with new information? This is the most
general formulation of the problem
of belief revision. An agent may be a human
being, a computer program or any
kind of system to which one can ascribe
beliefs and from which one would
expect rational reactions.
This is a multidisciplinary problem,
with applications to several areas. We
can give some examples of belief
revision as it appears in:
Belief revision has been extensively
studied in philosophy for extremely
idealized agents. The agents considered
are infinite beings, without any
limitation of memory, time,
or deductive ability. However, adapting these
solutions to less idealized agents
is far from trivial. In order to solve the
problems cited above in a way which
can be used by real agents, one has to
consider that any realizable agent
is a finite being and that calculations
take time (Cherniak, 1986). We
need a theory which takes these characteristics
--- finiteness, memory and time
limitations --- into account.
Departing from the standard logical
model for belief revision, the main goal
of the present work is to find
a theory that can be applied to more realistic
agents. We stress here that our
purpose is not to find a computational
implementation of existing theories,
but to elaborate a theory for less
idealized agents.
In a recent paper, Chopra and Parikh
(1999) presented some
desiderata for a belief revision
formalism which we also see as our goals:
distinction between explicit and
implicit beliefs,
no trivialization in the presence
of inconsistencies,
computational tractability, and
minimal change.
The main achievements of our work
are:
Organization of the Thesis
In the next chapter, we present
an overview of some theories about
resource-bounded agents. Although
being very informal, these theories
contain ideas which we will formalize
in the following chapters.
In Chapter 3, we will present an
overview of the main line of
research in belief revision. We
start by introducing the AGM paradigm and then
present some variations on it that
have been proposed in the literature.
In Chapter 4, we introduce our formal
framework.
We describe the belief state of
a resource-bounded agent and operations
that can be applied to it. We also
show how our framework relates to
the AGM paradigm and to Harman's
informal proposal. Our framework classifies
beliefs according to their status:
whether they are explicitly believed
or not, whether they are active
or not and whether they are fully accepted
or only provisional. All the operations
affect the set of active beliefs.
This set contains the beliefs which
are available at a certain time and it
changes according to the goals
of the agent.
In Chapters 5 and 6, we turn to
the problem of
deciding which beliefs should become
active for a belief change operation.
Chapter 5 presents a logical solution,
making use of the
notion of local inference. We offer
axiomatizations and representation
results for generalizations of
several belief change operations found
in the literature.
In Chapter 6 we use extra-logical
information in order
to select which part of the belief
state should become active. We
present a computationally efficient
method of retrieving the relevant part
of an agent's beliefs and show
how this method can be combined with
the logical results obtained in
Chapter 5.
In Chapter 7, we present an application
of the formal
framework developed in the preceding
chapters. We show how to use
extra-logical information present
in the system descriptions used for
model-based diagnosis in order
to focus on a small relevant portion
of the system. We also show how
an algorithm used for finding minimal
diagnoses can be adapted for implementing
belief revision operators.
Finally, in Chapter 8 we present
some conclusions and
point toward future work.