Severe Withdrawal (and Recovery)

Rott, Hans; Pagnucco, Maurice

doi:10.1023/a:1004344003217

Cited by 87 publications

(61 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The principle of entrenchment is similar to the principles of indifference, strict preference and weak indifference proposed in [41]. In the principle of indifference objects held in equal regard should be treated equally; in the principle of strict preference objects held in higher regard should be afforded a more favourable treatment.…”

Section: Belief Revisionmentioning

confidence: 89%

“…This is known as the principle of conservatism [29]. This specification, however, has a significant drawback in that it can lead to undesirable results [2,41]. Nevertheless, it forms the basis of partial-meet contractions, which select the 'best' elements in the set of all maximal subsets of K that do not imply the belief(s) to be contracted [1].…”

Section: Belief Revisionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Argument Revision

Snaith¹,

Reed²

2016

J Logic Computation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Understanding the dynamics of argumentation systems is a crucial component in the development of computational models of argument that are used as representations of belief. To that end, in this article, we introduce a model of Argument Revision, presented in terms of the contraction and revision of a system of structured argumentation. Argument Revision is influenced by theAGM model of belief revision, but with certain key differences. First,Argument Revision involves modifying the underlying model (system of argumentation) from which beliefs are derived, allowing for a finer-grained approach to modifying beliefs. Secondly, the richer structure provided by a system of argumentation permits a determination of minimal change based on quantifiable effects on the system as opposed to qualitative criteria such as entrenchment orderings. Argument Revision does, however, retain a close link to the AGM approach to belief revision. A basic set of postulates for rational revisions and contractions in Argument Revision is proposed; these postulates are influenced by, and capture the spirit of, those found in AGM belief revision. After specifying a determination of minimal change, based on measurable effects on the system, we conclude the article by going on to show how Argument Revision can be used as a strategic tool by a participant in a multi-agent dialogue, assisting with commitment retraction and dishonesty. In systems of argumentation that contain even small knowledge bases, it is difficult for a dialogue participant to fully assess the impact of seemingly trivial changes to that knowledge base, or other parts of the system; we demonstrate, by means of an example, that Argument Revision solves this problem through a determination of minimal change that is justifiable and intuitive.

show abstract

Section: Belief Revisionmentioning

confidence: 89%

Section: Belief Revisionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Argument Revision

Snaith¹,

Reed²

2016

J Logic Computation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Contraction from K removing A may be achieved in many ways so that the inquirer is called upon to make a decision. There is a broad and often deceptive unanimity that the choice made should "Keep loss at a minimum" as the Principle of Economy as formulated by Rott and Pagnucco ((Rott and Pagnucco, 1999), 502) stipulates. The unanimity unravels when the issue of evaluating "loss" is addressed.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As Rott and Pagnucco ((Rott and Pagnucco, 1999), 503) have recently observed: "The Principle of Economy has been severely compromised in the AGM framework." In a more recent article, Rott called the principles of Economy and Entrenchment "dogmas" "...not because almost all researchers kept to these principles (quite the opposite is true) but because so many authoritative voices proclaimed them to be the philosophical or methodological rationale for their theories (Rott, 2000).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Attempts to clarify the main guiding principles allegedly used in formulating AGM contraction have ended up in many cases in the proposal of deviant notions ( (Rott and Pagnucco, 1999) is a perfect example of this kind of attempt). Perhaps the influence of the AGM approach is due to the fact that the AGM trio were pioneers in providing exact axiomatic formulations of their proposals.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Contraction: On the Decision-Theoretical Origins of Minimal Change and Entrenchment

Arló-Costa

Levi

2006

Synthese

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.We present a decision-theoretically motivated notion of contraction which, we claim, encodes the principles of minimal change and entrenchment. Contraction is seen as an operation whose goal is to minimize loses of informational value. The operation is also compatible with the principle that in contracting A one should preserve the sentences better entrenched than A (when the belief set contains A). Even when the principle of minimal change and the latter motivation for entrenchment figure prominently among the basic intuitions in the works of, among others, Quine (Quine, 1973), Levi (Levi, 1980) (Levi, 1991), Harman (Harman, 1988), and Gardenfors (Gärdenfors, 1988), formal accounts of belief change (AGM, KM -see (Gärdenfors, 1988) and (Katsuno et al., 1991)) have abandoned both principles (see (Rott, 2000)). We argue for the principles and we show how to construct a contraction operation which obeys both. An axiom system is proposed. We also prove that the decisiontheoretic notion of contraction can be completely characterized in terms of the given axioms. Proving this type of completeness result is a well-known open problem in the field, whose solution requires employing both decision-theoretical techniques and logical methods recently used in belief change.

show abstract

Formal Epistemology and Logic

Arló-Costa

Fermé

2009

A Companion to Latin American Philosophy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Severe Withdrawal (and Recovery)

Cited by 87 publications

References 18 publications

Argument Revision

Argument Revision

Contraction: On the Decision-Theoretical Origins of Minimal Change and Entrenchment

Formal Epistemology and Logic

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About