Specified meet contraction
The paper draws its intuitive motivation from two perceived shortcomings in the AGM account of belief contraction: (1) it works through `large' items, namely maximal non-implying subsets of the belief set, rather than remain on the level of sentences in the belief set; (2) it may take us from a finitely based belief set to one that cannot be finitely based. As is well known, AGM partial meet contractions can be presented in a manner that avoids feature (1), e.g., as `safe contractions' (Alchourrón and Makinson 1985) or as contractions via epistemic entrenchment (Gärdenfors and Makinson 1988); but both these presentations leave feature (2) intact. To avoid it as well, the author's presentation uses as auxiliary apparatus a function \(f\) from sentences to sentences, and treats the contraction of sentence \(x\) from a closed belief set \(K = Cn(K)\) as an AGM full meet contraction from \(K\), but of \(f(x)\) rather than of \(x\). This automatically avoids feature (2) since, as shown by Alchourrón and Makinson in 1982, the full meet contraction of a sentence \(x\) from a closed belief set \(K\) is just the intersection of \(K\) with the set of classical consequences of the negation of \(x\), so that if sentence \(k\) axiomatizes \(K\) then the disjunction of \(k\) with the negation of \(x\) will axiomatize the result of the contraction. The author's construction turns out to be surprisingly flexible, and he shows that with suitable conditions on the `sentential selector' \(f\) it yields all and only those AGM partial meet contractions lacking feature (2). It is also shown how variant conditions on the sentential selector function provide links with other kinds of contraction, including the class of finite-based contractions and the `severe withdrawal' contractions of \textit{H. Rott} and \textit{M. Pagnucco} [``Severe withdrawal (and recovery), J. Philos. Log. 28, No.~5, 501--547 (1999; Zbl 0934.03024)]. Reviewer's comments: As the author has remarked in correspondence with the reviewer, we may combine results of Rott and Pagnucco with others in the paper under review, to characterize severe withdrawal in terms sentential selector functions with suitable constraints. Likewise for the class finitely-based contractions, this time combining with results of the author's textbook [A textbook of belief dynamics. Theory change and database updating. Dordrecht: Kluwer (1999; Zbl 0947.03023), Theorem 4 on p. 313]. It is unfortunate that these characterizations were not formulated explicitly in the paper under review.
- A survey of multiple contractions
- A textbook of belief dynamics. Theory change and database updating
- Belief contraction in the context of the general theory of rational choice
- Belief contraction without recovery
- scientific article; zbMATH DE number 3831894 (Why is no real title available?)
- Irrevocable belief revision and epistemic entrenchment
- Kernel contraction
- On the logic of theory change: Partial meet contraction and revision functions
- On the status of the postulate of recovery in the logic of theory change
- Severe withdrawal (and recovery)
- Theory contraction and base contraction unified
- Two methods of constructing contractions and revisions of knowledge systems
- Foundational belief change
- Severe withdrawal (and recovery)
- Systematic withdrawal
- Multiple kernel contraction
- Levi contractions and AGM contractions: A comparison
- Finite contractions on infinite belief sets
- Back to basics: belief revision through direct selection
- Four ways in which theories of belief revision could benefit from theories of epistemic justification
- Repertoire contraction
- Impossibility results for belief contraction
- Blockage contraction
- Maximal and perimaximal contraction
- Iterated descriptor revision and the logic of Ramsey test conditionals
- Reconstruction of contraction operators
- An Axiomatic Characterization of Ensconcement-Based Contraction
- Bootstrap contraction
- Eradication
- Global and iterated contraction and revision: an exploration of uniform and semi-uniform approaches
- Some Solved and Unsolved Remainder Equations
- Outcome level analysis of belief contraction
- Prioritized assertional-based removed sets revision of \textit{DL}-\textit{Lite} belief bases
- AGM 25 years. Twenty-five years of research in belief change
- Contraction Based on Sentential Selection
- On ensconcement and contraction
- Characterization of AGM Belief Contraction in Terms of Conditionals
- Multiple and iterated contraction reduced to single-step single-sentence contraction
This page was built for publication: Specified meet contraction
Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q946198)
