The DOI matches its Crossref record.
On the logic of theory change: Partial meet contraction and revision functions
Abstract
This paper extends earlier work by its authors on formal aspects of the processes of contracting a theory to eliminate a proposition and revising a theory to introduce a proposition. In the course of the earlier work, Gärdenfors developed general postulates of a more or less equational nature for such processes, whilst Alchourrón and Makinson studied the particular case of contraction functions that are maximal, in the sense of yielding a maximal subset of the theory (or alternatively, of one of its axiomatic bases), that fails to imply the proposition being eliminated. In the present paper, the authors study a broader class, including contraction functions that may be less than maximal. Specifically, they investigate “partial meet contraction functions”, which are defined to yield the intersection of some nonempty family of maximal subsets of the theory that fail to imply the proposition being eliminated. Basic properties of these functions are established: it is shown in particular that they satisfy the Gärdenfors postulates, and moreover that they are sufficiently general to provide a representation theorem for those postulates. Some special classes of partial meet contraction functions, notably those that are “relational” and “transitively relational”, are studied in detail, and their connections with certain “supplementary postulates” of Gàrdenfors investigated, with a further representation theorem established.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Multiagent systems: algorithmic, game-theoretic, and logical foundations
(2009) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.46-5662 · Cited by 1,756
Boutilier, C., & Beche, V. (1995) · Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/0004-3702(94)00025-v · Cited by 118
Opinion Dynamics with Confirmation Bias
Allahverdyan, A. E., & Galstyan, A. (2014) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0099557 · Cited by 90
A Ranking‐Theoretic Approach to Conditionals
Spohn, W. (2013) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1111/cogs.12057 · Cited by 49
(2006) · Cited by 12
(2011) · RUCforsk (Roskilde University) · Cited by 5
The Compaction Cliff in Long-Running AI Agent Memory
Zerhoudi, S., Mitrović, J., & Granitzer, M. (2026) · ACM · doi:10.1145/3799682.3840567 · Cited by 4
Dynamic turn in epistemic logic
Козаченко, Н. П. (2016) · doi:10.31812/0564/1653
Metadata
- Authors
- Alchourrón, C. E., Gärdenfors, P., & Makinson, D.
- Venue
- Journal of Symbolic Logic
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 1985-06
- Volume
- 50
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 510-530
- ISSN
- 0022-4812 (ISSN-L)
- 1943-5886
- OpenAlex
- W2149420462
- Cited by
- 3,222
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 7.67
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.