Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Non monotonic reasoning and belief revision: syntactic, semantic, foundational and coherence approaches

Non monotonic reasoning and belief revision: syntactic, semantic, foundational and coherence... The major approaches to belief revision and non monotonic reasoning proposed in the literature differ along a number of dimensions, including whether they are “syntax- based” or “semantic-based”, “foundational” or “coherentist”, “consistence-restoring” or “inconsistency-tolerant”. Our contribution towards clarifying the connections between these various approaches is threefold: •We show that the two main approaches to belief revision, the foundations and coherence theories, are mathematically equivalent, thus answering a question left open in [Gar90, Doy92], The distinction between syntax-based approaches to revision and approaches based on (semantic) preferential structures falls along similar lines, and their expressive equivalence is a consequence of this result. •We formally clarify the connection between belief revision and non monotonic reasoning, in a particularly simple way which also throws light on the connection between consistence- restoring and reasoning-from-inconsistency approaches [BDP95]. •As a direct application of the above, we show that Poole's (syntax-based) system of default reasoning and Shoham's preferential semantic for non monotonic reasoning are also expressively equivalent, in that they can represent the same set of non monotonic consequence relations. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics Taylor & Francis

Non monotonic reasoning and belief revision: syntactic, semantic, foundational and coherence approaches

del Val, Alvaro
Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics , Volume 7 (1-2): 28 – Jan 1, 1997
Download PDF
28 pages

Non monotonic reasoning and belief revision: syntactic, semantic, foundational and coherence approaches

Abstract

The major approaches to belief revision and non monotonic reasoning proposed in the literature differ along a number of dimensions, including whether they are “syntax- based” or “semantic-based”, “foundational” or “coherentist”, “consistence-restoring” or “inconsistency-tolerant”. Our contribution towards clarifying the connections between these various approaches is threefold: •We show that the two main approaches...
Loading next page...
 
/lp/taylor-francis/non-monotonic-reasoning-and-belief-revision-syntactic-semantic-8PXA6tdK29
Publisher
Taylor & Francis
Copyright
Copyright Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN
1958-5780
eISSN
1166-3081
DOI
10.1080/11663081.1997.10510906
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

The major approaches to belief revision and non monotonic reasoning proposed in the literature differ along a number of dimensions, including whether they are “syntax- based” or “semantic-based”, “foundational” or “coherentist”, “consistence-restoring” or “inconsistency-tolerant”. Our contribution towards clarifying the connections between these various approaches is threefold: •We show that the two main approaches to belief revision, the foundations and coherence theories, are mathematically equivalent, thus answering a question left open in [Gar90, Doy92], The distinction between syntax-based approaches to revision and approaches based on (semantic) preferential structures falls along similar lines, and their expressive equivalence is a consequence of this result. •We formally clarify the connection between belief revision and non monotonic reasoning, in a particularly simple way which also throws light on the connection between consistence- restoring and reasoning-from-inconsistency approaches [BDP95]. •As a direct application of the above, we show that Poole's (syntax-based) system of default reasoning and Shoham's preferential semantic for non monotonic reasoning are also expressively equivalent, in that they can represent the same set of non monotonic consequence relations.

Journal

Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics – Taylor & Francis

Published: Jan 1, 1997

Keywords: non monotonic reasoning; belief revision

There are no references for this article.