Abstract
We investigate the discrete (finite) case of the Popper–Renyi theory of conditional probability, introducing discrete conditional probabilistic models for knowledge and conditional belief, and comparing them with the more standard plausibility models. We also consider a related notion, that of safe belief, which is a weak (non-negatively introspective) type of “knowledge”. We develop a probabilistic version of this concept (“degree of safety”) and we analyze its role in games. We completely axiomatize the logic of conditional belief, knowledge and safe belief over conditional probabilistic models. We develop a theory of probabilistic dynamic belief revision, introducing probabilistic “action models” and proposing a notion of probabilistic update product, that comes together with appropriate reduction laws.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Alchourrón C., Gärdenfors P., Makinson D. (1985) On the logic of theory change: Partial meet contraction and revision functions. Journal of Symbolic Logic 50: 510–530
Arlo-Costa H., Parikh R. (2005) Conditional probability and defeasible inference. Journal of Philosophical Logic 34: 97–119
Aucher, G. (2003). A combined system for update logic and belief revision. Master’s thesis, ILLC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Aumann R. (1995) Backwards induction and common knowledge of rationality. Games and Economic Behavior 8: 6–19
Baltag A. (2002) A logic for suspicious players: Epistemic actions and belief updates in games. Bulletin of Economic Research 54(1): 1–46
Baltag, A., & Moss, L. (2004). Logics for epistemic programs. Synthese, 139, 165–224. Knowledge, Rationality & Action (pp. 1–60).
Baltag, A., Moss, L., & Solecki, S. (1998). The logic of common knowledge, public announcements, and private suspicions. In I. Gilboa (Ed.), Proceedings of the 7th Conference on Theoretical Aspects of Rationality and Knowledge (TARK 98) (pp. 43–56).
Baltag A., Smets S. (2006) Conditional doxastic models: A qualitative approach to dynamic belief revision. Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science 165: 5–21
Baltag, A., & Smets, S. (2006b). Dynamic belief revision over multi-agent plausibility models. In W. van der Hoek & M. Wooldridge (Eds.), Proceedings of LOFT’06 (pp. 11–24). Liverpool.
Baltag, A., & Smets, S. (2006c). The logic of conditional doxastic actions: A theory of dynamic multi-agent belief revision. In Proceedings of ESSLLI Workshop on Rationality and Knowledge.
Baltag, A., & Smets, S. (2007). Probabilistic dynamic belief revision. In J. van Benthem, S. Ju, & F. Veltman (Eds.), Proceedings of LORI’07 (pp. 21–39). London: College Publications.
Baltag A., Smets S. (2008) A qualitative theory of dynamic interactive belief revision. In: Bonanno G., van der Hoek W., Wooldridge M. (eds) Texts in logic and games (vol. 3). Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam
Board O. (2004) Dynamic interactive epistemology. Games and Economic Behaviour 49: 49–80
Boutilier C. (1995) On the revision of probabilistic belief states. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 36(1): 158–183
Gärdenfors P. (1988) Knowledge in flux: Modeling the dynamics of epistemic states. Bradford Books, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
Gerbrandy, J. (1999). Dynamic epistemic logic. Logic, language and information (Vol. 2). Stanford: CSLI Publications, Stanford University.
Halpern, J. (2001). Lexicographic probability, conditional probability, and nonstandard probability. In Proceedings of the Eighth Conference on Theoretical Aspects of Rationality and Knowledge (TARK 8) (pp. 17–30).
Halpern J. (2003) Reasoning about uncertainty. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
Katsuno H., Mendelzon A. (1992) On the difference between updating a knowledge base and revising it. In: Gärdenfors P. (eds) Cambridge tracts in theoretical computer science. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 183–203
Kooi B.P. (2003) Probabilistic dynamic epistemic logic. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 12: 381–408
Lehrer K. (1990) Theory of knowledge. Routledge, London
Mihalache, D. (2007). Safe belief, rationality and backwards induction in games. Masters Thesis in Computer Science. Oxford: Oxford University.
Pappas, G., Swain , M. (eds) (1978) Essays on knowledge and justification. Cornell University Press, Ithaca NY
Popper, K. (1968). The logic of scientific discovery (revised Edition) (1st ed., 1934). London Hutchison.
Renyi A. (1955) On a new axiomatic theory of probability. . Acta Mathematica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 6: 285–335
Renyi A. (1964) Sur les espaces simples des Probabilites conditionnelles. Annales de L’institut Henri Poincare: Section B: Calcul des probabilities et statistique B B1: 3–21
Stalnaker R. (1996) Knowledge, belief and counterfactual reasoning in games. Economics and Philosophy 12: 133–163
van Benthem J. (2003) Conditional probability meets update logic. Journal of Philosophical Logic 12(4): 409–421
van Benthem, J. (2006). Dynamic logic of belief revision. Technical Report, ILLC, DARE electronic archive, University of Amsterdam. To appear in Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics.
van Benthem, J., Gerbrandy, J., & Kooi, B. (2006a). Dynamic update with probabilities. In W. van der Hoek & M. Wooldridge (Eds.), Proceedings of LOFT’06. Liverpool.
van Benthem, J., & Liu, F. (2004). Dynamic logic of preference upgrade. Technical report. ILLC Research Report PP-2005-29.
van Benthem J., van Eijck J., Kooi B. (2006) Logics of communication and change. Information and Computation 204(11): 1620–1662
van Ditmarsch H. (2005) Prolegomena to dynamic logic for belief revision. Synthese (Knowledge, Rationality & Action) 147: 229–275
van Fraassen B. (1976) Representations of conditional probabilities. Journal of Philosophical Logic 5: 417–430
van Fraassen B. (1995) Fine-grained opinion, probability, and the logic of full belief. Journal of Philosophical Logic 24: 349–377
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Baltag, A., Smets, S. Probabilistic dynamic belief revision. Synthese 165, 179–202 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-008-9369-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-008-9369-8