Journal of Computer Science and Technology

, Volume 15, Issue 3, pp 202–212 | Cite as

Operational and complete approaches to belief revision

  • Li Wei Email author
  • Luan Shangmin 


Two operational approaches to belief revision are presented in this paper. The rules of R-calculus are modified in order to deduce all the maximal consistent subsets. Another set of rules is given in order to deduce all the minimal inconsistent subsets. Then a procedure, which can generate all the maximal consistent subsets, is presented. They are complete approaches, since all the maximal consistent subsets can be deduced or generated. In this paper, only the case of propositional logic is considered.


belief revision belief set maximal consistent subset 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    Doyle J. A truth maintenance system.Artificial Intelligence, 1979, 12: 231–272.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    Alchourron C E, Gardenfors P, Makinson D. On the Logic of theory change: Partial meet contraction and revision functions.The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 1985, 50: 510–530.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    Li Wei, Shen Ningchuan, Wang Ju. R-calculus: A logical approach for knowledge base maintenance.International Journal of Artificial Intelligence Tools, 1995, 4(1&2): 177–200.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Li Wei. An open logic system.Scientica Sinica (Series A), March 1993, 36(3): 362–375.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    Li Wei. A logical framework for knowledge base maintenance.J. of Comput. Sci. & Technol., 1995, 10(3): 194–205.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Boutilier C. Revision Sequences and Nested Conditionals. InProceedings of IJCAI-93, pp.519–525.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Adnan Darwiche, Judea Pearl. On the logic of Iterated Belief Revision. InProceedings of Conference on Theoretical Aspect of Reasoning about Knowledge, CA, 1994, pp.5–23.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Adnan Darwiche, Judea Pearl. On the Logic of iterated belief revision.Artificial Intelligence, 1997, 89(1–2): 1–29.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    Gallier J H. Logic for Computer Science, Foundations of Automatic Theorem Proving. John Wiley & Sons, 1987.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    Thomas Eiter, Georg Gottlob., On the complexity of propositional knowledge base revision, updates and counterfactuals.Artificial Intelligence, 1992, 57(2–3): 227–270.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Science Press, Beijing China and Allerton Press Inc. 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer Sciences and EngineeringBeijing University of Aeronautics and AstronauticsBeijingP.R. China
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceShandong UniversityJinanP.R. China

Personalised recommendations