Abstract
Necessary and sufficient conditions for choice functions to be rational have been intensively studied in the past. However, in these attempts, a choice function is completely specified. That is, given any subset of options, called an issue, the best option over that issue is always known, whilst in real-world scenarios, it is very often that only a few choices are known instead of all. In this paper, we study partial choice functions and investigate necessary and sufficient rationality conditions for situations where only a few choices are known. We prove that our necessary and sufficient condition for partial choice functions boils down to the necessary and sufficient conditions for complete choice functions proposed in the literature. Choice functions have been instrumental in belief revision theory. That is, in most approaches to belief revision, the problem studied can simply be described as the choice of possible worlds compatible with the input information, given an agent’s prior belief state. The main effort has been to devise strategies in order to infer the agents revised belief state. Our study considers the converse problem: given a collection of input information items and their corresponding revision results (as provided by an agent), does there exist a rational revision operation used by the agent and a consistent belief state that may explain the observed results?
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Alchourrón, C.E., Gärdenfors, P., Makinson, D.: On the logic of theory change: Partial meet functions for contraction and revision. J. Sym. Log. 50, 510–530 (1985)
Arrow, K.: Uncertainty and the welfare economics of medical care. American Economic Review 53(5), 941–973 (1963)
Biggs, N., Lloyd, E., Wilson, R.: Graph Theory. Oxford University Press (1986)
Biskup, J., Tadros, C.: Revising belief without revealing secrets. In: Sali, A., Lukasiewicz, T. (eds.) FoIKS 2012. LNCS, vol. 7153, pp. 51–70. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)
Bonanno, G.: Rational choice and agm belief revision. Artificial Intelligence 173(12–13), 1194–1203 (2009)
Booth, R., Nittka, A.: Reconstructing an agent’s epistemic state from observations. In: Procs. of IJCAI, pp. 394–399 (2005)
Chernoff, H.: Rational selection of decision functions. Econometrica 22(4), 422–443 (1954)
Darwiche, A., Pearl, J.: On the logic of iterated belief revision. Artificial Intelligence 89, 1–29 (1997)
Deb, R.: Binariness and rational choice. Mathematical Social Sciences 5, 97–106 (1983)
Delgrande, J., Dubois, D., Lang, J.: Iterated revision as prioritized merging. In: Proceedings of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, (KR 2006), pp. 210–220 (2006)
Delgrande, J., Jin, Y.: Parallel belief revision: Revising by sets of formulas. Artificial Intelligence 176(1), 2223–2245 (2012)
Dubois, D.: Three scenarios for the revision of epistemic states. Journal of Logic and Compution 18(5), 721–738 (2008)
Katsuno, H., Mendelzon, A.O.: Propositional knowledge base revision and minimal change. Artificial Intelligence 52, 263–294 (1991)
Lehmann, D.: Nonmonotonic logics and semantics. Journal of Logic and Computation 11(2), 229–256 (2001)
Lindström, S.: A semantic approach to nonmonotonic reasoning: inference operations and choice (1994)
Ma, J., Benferhat, S., Liu, W.: A belief revision framework for revising epistemic states with partial epistemic states. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning 59, 20–40 (2015)
Ma, J., Liu, W.: A general model for epistemic state revision using plausibility measures. In: Procs. of ECAI, pp. 356–360 (2008)
Ma, J., Liu, W.: Modeling belief change on epistemic states. In: Procs. of FLAIRS, pp. 553–558 (2009)
Ma, J., Liu, W.: A framework for managing uncertain inputs: an axiomization of rewarding. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning 52(7), 917–934 (2011)
Ma, J., Liu, W., Benferhat, S.: A belief revision framework for revising epistemic states with partial epistemic states. In: Procs. of AAAI, pp. 333–338 (2010)
Ma, J., Liu, W., Dubois, D., Prade, H.: Bridging jeffery’s rule, agm revision, and dempster conditioning in the theory of evidence. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence Tools 20(4), 691–720 (2011)
Ma, J., Liu, W., Hunter, A.: Modeling and reasoning with qualitative comparative clinical knowledge. International Journal of Intelligent Systems 26(1), 25–46 (2011)
Moulin, H.: Choice functions over a finite set: A summary. Social Choice and Welfare 2(2), 147–160 (1985)
Rott, H.: Change, choice and inference. Clarendon Press, Oxford (2001)
Sen, A.K.: Internal consistency of choice. Econometrica 61(3), 495–521 (1993)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this paper
Cite this paper
Ma, J., Liu, W., Dubois, D. (2015). Rational Partial Choice Functions and Their Application to Belief Revision. In: Zhang, S., Wirsing, M., Zhang, Z. (eds) Knowledge Science, Engineering and Management. KSEM 2015. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 9403. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-25159-2_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-25159-2_11
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-25158-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-25159-2
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)