The generality of the proposed framework is established by showing that credibility-limited belief update is recovered as a special case, while Katsuno--Mendelzon belief update emerges when credibility restrictions are removed and the transformation functions are taken to be identities.
Abstract
Belief update concerns changes in an agent's beliefs induced by changes in the underlying world. Standard Katsuno-Mendelzon update assumes that an epistemic input can be incorporated from every initially possible world, whereas credibility-limited belief update restricts, for each source world, the successor worlds regarded as credible or reachable. Nevertheless, existing credibility-limited approaches treat the epistemic input as an indivisible whole, and therefore cannot represent cases in which only part of a compound epistemic input can be realized. We introduce selective credibility-limited belief update, in which the epistemic input is transformed, relative to each source world, into a weaker proxy before the credibility-limited transition is performed. We provide semantic and axiomatic characterizations of the resulting class of update operators. We then identify two well-behaved sub-classes; namely, consistency-preserving update operators, which require every transformed epistemic input to be credible from its source world whenever the original epistemic input is consistent, and maximal consistency-preserving update operators, which additionally require the selected proxy to be maximally informative among the credible consequences of the original epistemic input. Finally, we establish the generality of the proposed framework by showing that credibility-limited belief update is recovered as a special case, while Katsuno--Mendelzon belief update emerges when credibility restrictions are removed and the transformation functions are taken to be identities. These results demonstrate that the framework provides a unified and strictly more expressive account of belief update, encompassing established approaches while supporting source-dependent selective acceptance.
The Predictive Justified Perspective (PJP) model is formally defined and proved that it retains the computational efficiency of state-based planning while ensuring logically sound belief reasoning (satisfying the KD45 axioms).
Guang Hu, Weijia Li, Yangmengfei Xu· Proceedings of the Internati...· 0 citations
Belief-Calibrated Optimization is introduced, a method that writes that belief down as a persistent in-context document and continually revises that document as new candidates are evaluated, and reaches a higher train passrate than a matched control that lacks only the world model.
Yu-Han Chen, Zhi-Hua Tian, Mahavir Dabas et al.· 1 citation
We present a unified framework for modeling
agents’ epistemic states and counterfactual conditionals.
The novelty of our approach lies at the
semantic level. We introduce a computationally
grounded semantics in which an agent’s doxastic
accessibility relation, needed to model the standard
notion of deductively closed...
E. Lorini, Dmitry Rozplokhas· Proceedings of the Thirty-Fi...· 0 citations
It is concluded that cascades are not only likely to occur but are sometimes unavoidable by “rational” means: in some situations, the group’s inability to track the truth is the direct consequence of each agent’s rational attempt at individual truth-tracking.
Unknown authors· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.