Selective Revision by Deductive Argumentation

  • Patrick Krümpelmann
  • Matthias Thimm
  • Marcelo A. Falappa
  • Alejandro J. García
  • Gabriele Kern-Isberner
  • Guillermo R. Simari
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7132)

Abstract

The success postulate of classic belief revision theory demands that after revising some beliefs with by information the new information is believed. However, this form of prioritized belief revision is not apt under many circumstances. Research in non-prioritized belief revision investigates forms of belief revision where success is not a desirable property. Herein, selective revision uses a two step approach, first applying a transformation function to decide if and which part of the new information shall be accepted, and second, incorporating the result using a prioritized revision operator. In this paper, we implement a transformation function by employing deductive argumentation to assess the value of new information. Hereby we obtain a non-prioritized revision operator that only accepts new information if believing in the information is justifiable with respect to the beliefs. By making use of previous results on selective revision we prove that our revision operator satisfies several desirable properties. We illustrate the use of the revision operator by means of examples and compare it with related work.

Keywords

Transformation Function Belief Revision Belief Base Argument Structure Argumentation Framework 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Bench-Capon, T.J.M., Dunne, P.E.: Argumentation in artificial intelligence. Artificial Intelligence 171, 619–641 (2007)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Besnard, P., Hunter, A.: A logic-based theory of deductive arguments. Artificial Intelligence 128(1-2), 203–235 (2001)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Booth, R.: A negotiation-style framework for non-prioritised revision. In: Proceedings of TARK 2001, pp. 137–150 (2001)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Makinson, D., Alchourron, C.E., Gärdenfors, P.: On the logic of theory change: Partial meet contraction and revision functions. The Journal of Symbolic Logic 50(2), 510–530 (1985)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Delgrande, J.P., Jin, Y.: Parallel belief revision. In: Proceedings of the 23rd National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI 2008 (2008)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dung, P.M.: On the Acceptability of Arguments and its Fundamental Role in Nonmonotonic Reasoning, Logic Programming and n-Person Games. Artificial Intelligence 77(2), 321–358 (1995)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Falappa, M.A., Kern-Isberner, G., Simari, G.R.: Belief revision and argumentation theory. In: Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 341–360. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Falappa, M.A., Kern-Isberner, G., Simari, G.R.: Explanations, belief revision and defeasible reasoning. Artificial Intelligence 141(1), 1–28 (2002)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fermé, E., Hansson, S.O.: Selective revision. Studia Logica 63, 331–342 (1999)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    García, A.J., Simari, G.R.: Defeasible Logic Programming: An Argumentative Approach. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 4(1–2), 95–138 (2004)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hansson, S.O.: A survey of non-prioritized belief revision. Erkenntnis 50(2-3), 413–427 (1999)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hansson, S.O.: A Textbook of Belief Dynamics. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell (2001)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Zhang, D., Foo, N., Meyer, T., Kwok, R.: Negotiation as mutual belief revision. In: Proceedings of AAAI 2004, pp. 317–322 (2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Patrick Krümpelmann
    • 1
  • Matthias Thimm
    • 1
  • Marcelo A. Falappa
    • 2
  • Alejandro J. García
    • 2
  • Gabriele Kern-Isberner
    • 1
  • Guillermo R. Simari
    • 2
  1. 1.Technische Universität DortmundGermany
  2. 2.Universidad Nacional del SurBahía BlancaArgentina

Personalised recommendations