User menu

The dynamics of relevance: adaptive belief revision

Bibliographic reference Van De Putte, Frederik ; Verdée, Peter. The dynamics of relevance: adaptive belief revision. In: Synthese : an international journal for epistemology, methodology and philosophy of science, Vol. 187, no. S1, p. 1-42 (2012)
Permanent URL
  1. Alchourrón Carlos E., Gärdenfors Peter, Makinson David, On the logic of theory change: Partial meet contraction and revision functions , 10.2307/2274239
  2. Batens D. (1999) Inconsistency-adaptive logics. In: Orłowska E. (ed) Logic at work. Essays dedicated to the memory of Helena Rasiowa. Physica Verlag (Springer), Heidelberg, pp 445–472
  3. Batens, D. (2001). A general characterization of adaptive logics. Logique et Analyse, 173–175, 45–68. Appeared 2003.
  4. Batens Diderik, A procedural criterion for final derivability in inconsistency-adaptive logics, 10.1016/j.jal.2004.07.018
  5. Batens Diderik, A Universal Logic Approach to Adaptive Logics, 10.1007/s11787-006-0012-5
  6. Batens Diderik, Clercq Kristof De, Verdée Peter, Meheus Joke, Yes fellows, most human reasoning is complex, 10.1007/s11229-007-9268-4
  7. Batens D., Meheus J., Provijn D., Verhoeven L. (2003) Some adaptive logics for diagnosis. Logic and Logical Philosophy 11/12: 39–65
  8. Batens D., Straßer C., Verdée P. (2009) On the transparency of defeasible logics: Equivalent premise sets, equivalence of their extensions, and maximality of the lower limit. Logique et Analyse 207: 281–304
  9. Bienvenu, M., Herzig, A., & Qi, G. (2008). Prime implicate-based belief revision operators. In Proceedings of the 2008 conference on ECAI 2008: 18th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (pp. 741–742). Amsterdam: IOS Press.
  10. Chopra Samir, Parikh Rohit, 10.1023/a:1018960323808
  11. Gärdenfors P. (1978) Conditionals and changes of belief. Acta Philosophica Fennica 30: 381–404
  12. Gärdenfors P. (1982) Rules for rational changes of belief. Philosophical Studies 34: 88–101
  13. Hansson Sven Ove, A Textbook of Belief Dynamics, ISBN:9780792353294, 10.1007/978-94-007-0814-3
  14. Hansson, S. O. (2006). The logic of belief revision. .
  15. Horsten Leon, Welch Philip, The Undecidability of Propositional Adaptive Logic, 10.1007/s11229-006-9049-5
  16. Jackson Peter, Computing prime implicates, 10.1145/131214.131223
  17. Kourousias G., Makinson D. (2006) Respecting relevance in belief change. Análisis Filosófico 26: 53–61
  18. Kourousias George, Makinson David, Parallel interpolation, splitting, and relevance in belief change , 10.2178/jsl/1191333851
  19. Makinson David, Propositional relevance through letter-sharing, 10.1016/j.jal.2008.12.001
  20. Parikh R. (1999) Beliefs, belief revision, and splitting languages. Logic, Language, and Computation 2: 266–278
  21. Perrussel, L., Marchi, J., & Zhang, D. (2011). Characterizing relevant belief revision operators. In AI 2010: Advances in Artificial Intelligence. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Vol. 6464, pp. 42–51). Heidelberg: Springer.
  22. Pollock John L., Defeasible Reasoning, 10.1207/s15516709cog1104_4
  23. Shoham Y. (1987) A semantical approach to nonmonotonic logics. In: Ginsberg M. L. (ed) Readings in non-monotonic reasoning. Morgan Kaufmann, Los Altos, CA, pp 227–249
  24. Stolpe, A. (2010). Relevance, derogation and permission: A case for a normal form for a code of norms. In Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence (Lecture Notes in Computer Science) (Vol. 6181, pp. 98–115). Heidelberg: Springer.
  25. Van De Putte F., Hierarchic adaptive logics, 10.1093/jigpal/jzr025
  26. Van De Putte F., Prime implicates and relevant belief revision, 10.1093/logcom/exr040
  27. Verdée Peter, Adaptive logics using the minimal abnormality strategy are $$\Pi^1_1$$ -complex, 10.1007/s11229-007-9291-5
  28. Verdée, P. (2012). A proof procedure for adaptive logics. Logic Journal of the IGPL, in press. .
  29. Verhoeven L. (2001) All premisses are equal, but some are more equal than others. Logique et Analyse 173–174–175: 165–188
  30. Verhoeven L. (2003) Proof theories for some prioritized consequence relations. Logique et Analyse 183–184: 325–344
  31. Wu Maonian, Zhang Mingyi, Algorithms and application in decision-making for the finest splitting of a set of formulae, 10.1016/j.knosys.2009.08.001
  32. Wu, M., Zhu, Z., Zhang, M. (2008). Partial meet contraction based on relevance criterion. In Proceedings of the International MultiConference of Engineers and Computer Scientists, Hong Kong.