Skip to main content

(Dis)Belief Change Based on Messages Processing

  • Conference paper
Computational Logic in Multi-Agent Systems (CLIMA 2004)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 3259))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

This paper focuses on the features of belief change when agents have to consider information received from other agents. We focus on belief change operators when agents have to process messages about a static world. We propose to consider agents’ belief state as a set of pairs 〈belief, origin of the belief〉 combined with a preference relation over the agents embedded in the multi-agent system. The belief revision procedure for handling received messages is a safe base revision procedure where messages are considered in their syntactic form. According to the reliability of the sources of the conflicting belief, agents remove the less reliable belief in order to handle the received message. Notice that the less reliable source can be the sender of the message itself. In order not to loose precious information conflicting belief are not removed but considered as potential belief. As the agent changes its belief, potential belief is reconsidered and may be reinstated as current belief. In a similar way, messages can concern statements that should not be believed, called disbelief. As belief, disbelief can become potential. These different kinds of belief enables us to propose a new semantics for a modal based language for describing (dis)belief. Agents may handle sequences of messages since the proposed belief change operators handle iterated belief change.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alchourrón, C., Makinson, D.: The logic of Theory Change: Safe Contraction. Studia Logica 44, 405–422 (1985)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Chopra, S., Ghose, A., Meyer, T.: Non-Prioritized Ranked Belief Change. Journal of Philosophical Logic 32(4), 417–443 (2003)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Darwiche, A., Pearl, J.: On the logic of Iterated Belief Revision. Artificial intelligence 89(1), 1–29 (1997)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Dragoni, A., Giorgini, P.: Revising beliefs received from multiple source. In: Williams, M.A., Rott, H. (eds.) Frontiers of Belief Revision, Applied Logic. Kluwer, Dordrecht (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Fagin, R., Ullman, J., Vardi, M.: On the semantics of Updates in Databases. In: Proceedings of the second ACM SIGACT-SIGMOD Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, Atlanta, Ga., USA, pp. 352–365 (1983)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Friedman, N., Halpern, J.: Belief revision: a critique. In: Carlucci Aiello, L., Doyle, J., Shapiro, S. (eds.) Proceedings of KR 1996, pp. 421–431. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Gärdenfors, P.: Knowledge in flux: Modeling the Dynamics of Epistemic States. MIT Press, Cambridge (1988)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Hansson, S.O.: A Survey of Non-Prioritized Belief Revision. Erkenntnis 50, 413–427 (1999)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Katsuno, H., Mendelzon, A.: Propositional Knowledge Base Revision and Minimal Change. Artificial Intelligence 3(52), 263–294 (1991)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Nebel, B.: Syntax-based approaches to belief revision. In: Gärdenfors, P. (ed.) Belief revision. Journal of Cambridge Tracts in Theoretical Computer Science, vol. 29, pp. 52–88. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1992)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Perrussel, L.: Handling sequences of belief change in a multi-agent context. In: Schillo, M., Klusch, M., Müller, J., Tianfield, H. (eds.) MATES 2003. LNCS, vol. 2831, pp. 119–130. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. Perrussel, L., Thévenin, J.M.: A logical approach for describing (dis)belief change and message processing. In: Proceedings of the AAMAS 2004. ACM, New York (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Rao, A.: Dynamics of belief systems: A philosophical, logical, and ai perspective. Technical Report 02, Australian Artificial Intelligence Institute, Melbourne, Australia (1989)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Roorda, J.W., van der Hoek, W., Meyer, J.J.: Iterated belief change in mas. In: Castelfranchi, C., Johnson, W.L. (eds.) Proceedings of AAMAS 2002, pp. 889–896. ACM, New York (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Wooldridge, M., Jennings, N.R.: Intelligent agents: Theory and practice. The Knowledge Engineering Review 10(2), 115–152 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2004 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Perrussel, L., Thévenin, JM. (2004). (Dis)Belief Change Based on Messages Processing. In: Dix, J., Leite, J. (eds) Computational Logic in Multi-Agent Systems. CLIMA 2004. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 3259. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30200-1_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30200-1_11

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-24010-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-30200-1

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics