Studia Logica

, Volume 52, Issue 3, pp 339–379 | Cite as

Five faces of minimality

  • David Makinson
Article

Abstract

We discuss similarities and residual differences, within the general semantic framework of minimality, between defeasible inference, belief revision, counterfactual conditionals, updating — and also conditional obligation in deontic logic. Our purpose is not to establish new results, but to bring together existing material to form a clear overall picture.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    Alchourrón, C.E.: 1971,The intuitive background of normative legal discourse and its formalization Journal of Philosophical Logic 1 pp. 447–463.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Alchourrón, C.E.: 199*,Philosophical foundations of deontic logic and the logic of defeasible conditionals to appear in J.J.C. Meyer and R.J. Wieringa (eds),Deontic Logic in Computer Science Wiley, USA.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Alchourrón, C.E. andE. Bulygin: 1971,Normative Systems Springer-Verlag, Berlin.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Alchourrón, C.E., P. Gärdenfors andD. Makinson: 1985,On the logic of theory change: partial meet contraction and revision functions Journal of Symbolic Logic 50 pp. 510–530.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Alchourrón, C.E. andD. Makinson: 1985,On the logic of theory change: safe contraction Studia Logica 44 pp. 405–422.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Allen, J., R. Fikes andE. Sandewall: 1991,KR'91: Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning Morgan Kaufman, San Mateo California.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Åqvist, L.: 1984,Deontic logic in Gabbay and Guenthner (eds),Handbook of Philosophical Logic vol. II D. Reidel Publ. Co., Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Arlo Costa, H. andR. Carnota: 1989,Nonmonotonic preferential logic and conditional logic, Proc. IX Cong. Internacional Soc. Chilena de Computacion. Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Arlo Costa, H. andS. Shapiro: 1992,Maps between nonmonotonic and conditional logic KR'92: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning Morgan Kaufman, San Mateo California.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    van Benthem, J.: 1989,Semantic parallels in natural language and computation in H. Ebbinghaus et alia (eds),Logic Colloquium '87 North-Holland, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    Bell, J.: 1990,The logic of nonmonotonicity Artificial Intelligence 41 pp. 365–374.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    Bell, J.: 1991,Pragmatic reasoning, in Allen and others [1991], pp. 50–60.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    Boutilier, C.: 1990,Conditional logics of normality as modal systems, AAAI 90: Proceedings of the Eighth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI Press/MIT Press, pp. 594–598, with proofs in Technical Report KRR-TR-90-4, Computer Science Department, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    Boutilier, C.: 1991,Inaccessible worlds and irrelevance: preliminary report, IJCAI 91: Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 413–418.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    Boutilier, C.: 1992,Conditional Logics for Default Reasoning and Belief Revision, (Ph.D. thesis), Technical Report 92-1, Department of Computer Science, University of British Columbia.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    Boutilier, C.: 1992a,Sequences of revisions: on the semantics of nested conditionals, Technical Report 92–24, Department of Computer Science, University of British Columbia.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    Burgess, J.: 1981,Quick completeness proofs for some logics of conditionals Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 22 pp. 76–84.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    Carnota, R.: 1992,Condicionales derrotables e inferencias no monotonos, Iberamia 92: Congreso Iboamericano de Inteligencia Artificial, Preprints, pp. 377–397.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    Delgrande, P.: 1987,A first-order logic for prototypical properties Artificial Intelligence 33 pp. 105–130.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    Delgrande, P.: 1988,An approach to default reasoning based on a first-order conditional logic: revised report Artificial Intelligence 36 pp. 63–90.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    Dix, J, andD. Makinson: 1992,A note on the relationship between KLM and MAK models for nonmonotonic inference operations Journal of Logic, Language and Information 1 pp. 131–140.Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    Fagin, R., J.D. Ullman andM.Y. Vardi: 1983,On the semantics of updates in databases, Proceedings of the Second ACM SIGACT-SIGMOD, pp. 352–365.Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    Føllesdal, D. andR. Hilpinen: 1971,Deontic logic: an introduction in R. Hilpinen (ed.),Deontic Logic: Introductory and Systematic Readings D. Reidel Publ. Co., Dordrecht, pp. 1–35.Google Scholar
  24. [24]
    Fraassen, B. van: 1972,The logic of conditional obligation Journal of Philosophical Logic 1 pp. 417–438.Google Scholar
  25. [25]
    Freund, M.: 199*,Injective models and disjunctive relations, to appear inJournal of Logic and Computation. Google Scholar
  26. [26]
    Fuhrmann, A.: 1991,Conditional logics and cumulative logics Konstanzer Berichte Logik und Wissenschaftstheorie 14, with an extended abstract inBulletin of the Section of Logic of the Polish Academy of Sciences 20 1991, pp. 44–51.Google Scholar
  27. [27]
    Gärdenfors, P.: 1988,Knowledge in Flux: Modeling the Dynamics of Epistemic States MIT Press, Cambridge Mass.Google Scholar
  28. [28]
    Grahne, G.: 1991,Updates and counterfactuals in Allen and others 1991, pp. 269–276. Also as Technical Report KRR-TR-91-3, Computer Science Department, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
  29. [29]
    Grove, A.: 1988,Two modellings for theory change Journal of Philosophical Logic 17 pp. 157–170.Google Scholar
  30. [30]
    Hansson, B.: 1969,An analysis of some deontic logics Nous 3, pp. 373–398. Reprinted in R. Hilpinen, (ed.)Deontic Logic: Introductory and Systematic Readings D. Reidel Publ. Co., Dordrecht 1971, pp. 121–147.Google Scholar
  31. [31]
    Hansson, S.O.: 1992,In defense of base contraction Synthese 91 pp. 239–245.Google Scholar
  32. [32]
    Hansson, S.O.: 1992a,A dyadic representation of belief, in P. Gärdenfors (ed.),Belief Revision, Cambridge University Press, pp. 89–121.Google Scholar
  33. [33]
    Hohfeld, W.N.: 1913,Some fundamental legal conceptions as applied in judicial reasoning Yale Law Journal 23, reprinted in W.C. Wheeler (ed.),Fundamental Legal Conceptions and other Essays Greenwood Press, Westport 1978.Google Scholar
  34. [34]
    Katsuno, H. andA.O. Mendelzon: 1991,Propositional knowledge base revision and minimal change Artificial Intelligence 52 pp. 263–294.Google Scholar
  35. [35]
    Katsuno, H. andA.O. Mendelzon: 1992,On the difference between updating a knowledge base and revising it in P. Gärdenfors (ed.),Belief Revision Cambridge University Press, pp. 183–203. Preliminary versions appeared in Allen and others 1991, pp. 387–394, and Technical Report KRR-TR-90-6, Computer Science Department, University of Toronto, 1990.Google Scholar
  36. [36]
    Katsuno, H. andK. Satoh: 1991,A unified view of consequence relations, belief revision, and conditional logic, IJCAI 91: Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 406–412.Google Scholar
  37. [37]
    Keller, A. andM. Winslett Wilkins: 1985,On the use of an extended relational model to handle changing incomplete information IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering SE-11:7, pp. 620–633.Google Scholar
  38. [38]
    Kraus, S., D. Lehmann andM. Magidor: 1990,Nonmonotonic reasoning, preferential models and cumulative logics Artificial Intelligence 44 pp. 167–207.Google Scholar
  39. [39]
    Kripke, S.: 1959,A completeness theorem in modal logic Journal of Symbolic Logic 24 pp. 1–14.Google Scholar
  40. [40]
    Kripke, S.: 1963,Semantical analysis of modal logic I Zeitschrift für Mathematische Logik und Grundlagen der Mathematik 9 pp. 67–96.Google Scholar
  41. [41]
    Lamarre, P.: 1991,S4 as the logic of non-monotonicity, in Allen and others [1991], pp. 357–367.Google Scholar
  42. [42]
    Lehmann, D. andM. Magidor: 1992,What does a conditional knowledge base entail? Artificial Intelligence Journal 55 pp. 1–60.Google Scholar
  43. [43]
    Lewis, D.: 1973,Counterfactuals Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  44. [44]
    Lewis, D.: 1974,Semantic analyses for dyadic deontic logic in S. Stenlund (ed.)Logical Theory and Semantic Analysis D. Reidel Publ. Co., Dordrecht, pp. 1–14.Google Scholar
  45. [45]
    Lindahl, L.: 1977,Position and Change: A Study in Law and Logic D. Reidel Publ. Co., Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  46. [46]
    Makinson, D.: 1986,On the formal representation of rights relations Journal of Philosophical Logic 15 pp. 403–425.Google Scholar
  47. [47]
    Makinson, D.: 1989,General theory of cumulative inference in M. Beinfrank and others (eds),Non-Monotonic Reasoning Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Lecture Notes on Artificial Intelligence no 346, pp. 1–18.Google Scholar
  48. [48]
    Makinson, D.: 199*,General patterns in nonmonotonic reasoning, in D. Gabbay and C. Hogger (eds),Handbook of Logic for Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming, vol. II, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  49. [49]
    Makinson, D. andP. Gärdenfors: 1991,The relations between the logic of theory change and nonmonotonic logic in A. Fuhrmann and M. Morreau (eds),The Logic of Theory Change Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence no 465, pp. 185–205.Google Scholar
  50. [50]
    Nejdl, W.: 1992,The P systems: a systematic classification of nonmonotonicity: extended report, unpublished manuscript. This extends and partly corrects a paper with the same substantive title inAAAI 91 : Proceedings of the Ninth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI Press/MIT Press, with proofs in Technical Report, University of Vienna, March 1991.Google Scholar
  51. [51]
    Nute, D.: 1984,Nonmonotonic reasoning and conditionals ACMC Research Report 01-0002, University of Georgia, Athens GA.Google Scholar
  52. [52]
    Nute, D.: 1988,Defeasible reasoning and decision support systems Decision Support Systems 4 pp. 97–110.Google Scholar
  53. [53]
    Nute, D.: 199*,Defeasible logic, in D.Gabbay and C.Hogger (eds),Handbook of Logic for Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming, vol. II, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  54. [54]
    Rott, H.: 1992,Preferential belief change using generalized epistemic entrenchment Journal of Logic, Language and Information, 1 pp. 45–78.Google Scholar
  55. [55]
    Rott, H.: 199*,Belief contraction in the context of the general theory of rational choice, to appear inThe Journal of Symbolic Logic. A preliminary version appeared asOn the logic of theory change: partial meet contraction and prioritized base contraction, Konstanzer Berichte Logik und Wissenschaftstheorie 27, May 1992.Google Scholar
  56. [56]
    Schlechta, K.: 199*,Two representation results for ranked preferential structures, to appear in the proceedings of the LogIn workshop, Konstanz, October 1992 (Springer-Verlag, Berlin).Google Scholar
  57. [57]
    Shoham, Y.: 1988,Reasoning about Change MIT Press, Cambridge, USA.Google Scholar
  58. [58]
    Stalnaker, R.: 1968,A theory of conditionals in N. Rescher (ed.),Studies in Logical Theory Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 98–112.Google Scholar
  59. [59]
    Veltman, F.: 1985,Logics for Conditionals, doctoral thesis, University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  60. [60]
    Winslett, M.: 1988,Reasoning about action using a possible models approach, Proceedings Seventh National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 89 – 93.Google Scholar
  61. [61]
    Wright, G. H. von: 1964,A new system of deontic logic, Danish Yearbook of Philosophy 1, pp. 173 – 182; reprinted in R. Hilpinen (ed.),Deontic Logic: Introductory and Systematic Readings D. Reidel Publ. Co., Dordrecht 1971, pp. 105–120.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • David Makinson
    • 1
  1. 1.Ville D'AvrayFrance

Personalised recommendations