{"title":"Parikh关联敏感信念修正准则的推广","authors":"T. Aravanis","doi":"10.1145/3572907","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Parikh proposed his relevance-sensitive axiom to remedy the weakness of the classical AGM paradigm in addressing relevant change. An insufficiency of Parikh’s criterion, however, is its dependency on the contingent beliefs of a belief set to be revised, since the former only constrains the revision process of splittable theories (i.e., theories that can be divided in mutually disjoint compartments). The case of arbitrary non-splittable belief sets remains out of the scope of Parikh’s approach. On that premise, we generalize Parikh’s criterion, introducing (both axiomatically and semantically) a new notion of relevance, which we call relevance at the sentential level. We show that the proposed notion of relevance is universal (as it is applicable to arbitrary belief sets) and acts in a more refined way as compared to Parikh’s proposal; as we illustrate, this latter feature of relevance at the sentential level potentially leads to a significant drop in the computational resources required for implementing belief revision. Furthermore, we prove that Dalal’s popular revision operator respects, to a certain extent, relevance at the sentential level. Last but not least, the tight relation between local and relevance-sensitive revision is pointed out.","PeriodicalId":50916,"journal":{"name":"ACM Transactions on Computational Logic","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Generalizing Parikh’s Criterion for Relevance-Sensitive Belief Revision\",\"authors\":\"T. Aravanis\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/3572907\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Parikh proposed his relevance-sensitive axiom to remedy the weakness of the classical AGM paradigm in addressing relevant change. An insufficiency of Parikh’s criterion, however, is its dependency on the contingent beliefs of a belief set to be revised, since the former only constrains the revision process of splittable theories (i.e., theories that can be divided in mutually disjoint compartments). The case of arbitrary non-splittable belief sets remains out of the scope of Parikh’s approach. On that premise, we generalize Parikh’s criterion, introducing (both axiomatically and semantically) a new notion of relevance, which we call relevance at the sentential level. We show that the proposed notion of relevance is universal (as it is applicable to arbitrary belief sets) and acts in a more refined way as compared to Parikh’s proposal; as we illustrate, this latter feature of relevance at the sentential level potentially leads to a significant drop in the computational resources required for implementing belief revision. Furthermore, we prove that Dalal’s popular revision operator respects, to a certain extent, relevance at the sentential level. Last but not least, the tight relation between local and relevance-sensitive revision is pointed out.\",\"PeriodicalId\":50916,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACM Transactions on Computational Logic\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACM Transactions on Computational Logic\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"94\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/3572907\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"数学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"COMPUTER SCIENCE, THEORY & METHODS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACM Transactions on Computational Logic","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3572907","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"数学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, THEORY & METHODS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Generalizing Parikh’s Criterion for Relevance-Sensitive Belief Revision
Parikh proposed his relevance-sensitive axiom to remedy the weakness of the classical AGM paradigm in addressing relevant change. An insufficiency of Parikh’s criterion, however, is its dependency on the contingent beliefs of a belief set to be revised, since the former only constrains the revision process of splittable theories (i.e., theories that can be divided in mutually disjoint compartments). The case of arbitrary non-splittable belief sets remains out of the scope of Parikh’s approach. On that premise, we generalize Parikh’s criterion, introducing (both axiomatically and semantically) a new notion of relevance, which we call relevance at the sentential level. We show that the proposed notion of relevance is universal (as it is applicable to arbitrary belief sets) and acts in a more refined way as compared to Parikh’s proposal; as we illustrate, this latter feature of relevance at the sentential level potentially leads to a significant drop in the computational resources required for implementing belief revision. Furthermore, we prove that Dalal’s popular revision operator respects, to a certain extent, relevance at the sentential level. Last but not least, the tight relation between local and relevance-sensitive revision is pointed out.
期刊介绍:
TOCL welcomes submissions related to all aspects of logic as it pertains to topics in computer science. This area has a great tradition in computer science. Several researchers who earned the ACM Turing award have also contributed to this field, namely Edgar Codd (relational database systems), Stephen Cook (complexity of logical theories), Edsger W. Dijkstra, Robert W. Floyd, Tony Hoare, Amir Pnueli, Dana Scott, Edmond M. Clarke, Allen E. Emerson, and Joseph Sifakis (program logics, program derivation and verification, programming languages semantics), Robin Milner (interactive theorem proving, concurrency calculi, and functional programming), and John McCarthy (functional programming and logics in AI).
Logic continues to play an important role in computer science and has permeated several of its areas, including artificial intelligence, computational complexity, database systems, and programming languages.
The Editorial Board of this journal seeks and hopes to attract high-quality submissions in all the above-mentioned areas of computational logic so that TOCL becomes the standard reference in the field.
Both theoretical and applied papers are sought. Submissions showing novel use of logic in computer science are especially welcome.