Advertisement

Journal of Logic, Language and Information

, Volume 12, Issue 4, pp 409–421 | Cite as

Conditional Probability Meets Update Logic

  • Johan van Benthem
Article

Abstract

Dynamic update of information states is a new paradigm in logicalsemantics. But such updates are also a traditional hallmark ofprobabilistic reasoning. This note brings the two perspectives togetherin an update mechanism for probabilities which modifies state spaces.

Bayes' law dynamic logic epistemic logic probability update 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Baltag, A., Moss, L., and Solecki, S., 1998, “The logic of public announcements, common knowledge and private suspicions,” pp. 43–56 in Proceedings TARK 1998, Los Altos, CA: Morgan Kaufman.Google Scholar
  2. Baltag, A., Moss, L., and Solecki, S., 2002, Updated version of the preceding, Department of Cognitive Science, Indiana University, Bloomington, and Department of Computing, Oxford University.Google Scholar
  3. Fagin, R. and Halpern, J., 1994, “Reasoning about knowledge and probability,” Journal of the ACM 41, 340–367.Google Scholar
  4. Fagin, R., Halpern, J., Moses, Y., and Vardi, M., 1995, Reasoning about Knowledge, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  5. Good, I., 1965, The Estimation of Probabilities, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  6. Gruenwald, P. and Halpern, J., 2003, “Updating probabilities,” Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, to appear.Google Scholar
  7. Hirshleifer, J. and Riley, J.G., 1992, The Analytics of Uncertainty and Information, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Kemeny, J., Snell, J., and Thompson, G., 1974, Introduction to Finite Mathematics, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  9. Kooi, B., 1999, “The Monty Hall dilemma,” Master's Thesis, Department of Philosophy, University of Groningen.Google Scholar
  10. Kooi, B., 2001, “Probabilistic dynamic epistemic logic,” Department of Computer Science, University of Groningen.Google Scholar
  11. van Benthem, J., 2001, “Games in dynamic epistemic logic,” in Bulletin of Economic Research 53, 219–248.Google Scholar
  12. van Benthem, J., 2002, “Conditional probability is update logic,” Lecture Note, Department of Philosophy, Stanford University.Google Scholar
  13. van Benthem, J., 2003, “One is a lonely number,” Report PP-2003-07, Institute for Logic, Language and Computation, University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  14. van Ditmarsch, H., 2000, “Knowledge games,” Dissertation DS-2000-06, Institute for Logic, Language and Computation, University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  15. van Rooy, R., 2002, “Utility, informativity, and protocols,” in Proceedings Logic and the Foundations of the Theory of Games and Decisions, LOFT-5, Torino, Italy, G. Bonanno et al., eds.Google Scholar
  16. van Rooy, R., 2003, “Quality and quantity of information exchange,” Journal of Logic, Language and Information 12, 423–451.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Johan van Benthem
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.FNWI/ILLC, Universiteit van AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Department of PhilosophyStanford UniversityU.S.A.

Personalised recommendations