Propositional belief base update and minimal change
Herzig, Andreas and Rifi, Omar
In this paper we examine ten concrete propositional update operations
of the literature. We start by completely characterizing
their relative strength and their computational complexity.
Then we evaluate the competing update operations w.r.t. the
postulates proposed by Katsuno and Mendelzon.
It turns out that the majority violates most of
the postulates. We argue that all violated postulates are undesirable
except one. After that we evaluate the update operations w.r.t.
another property which has been investigated extensively in the literature,
viz. that disjunctive updates should not be identified with the exclusive
disjunction. We argue that this is desirable, and show that the
argument gives further support to the rejection of two of the postulates.
Finally we study how the different approaches accommodate general laws
governing the world, alias integrity constraints. Summing up our
results, we conclude that only two of the update operations are satisfactory.
PDF of conference publication (ECAI 1998)
author = "Herzig, Andreas and Rifi, Omar",
title = "Propositional belief base update and minimal change",
journal = "Artificial Intelligence Journal",
year = "1999",
volume = "115",
number = "1",
pages = "107--138",
month = dec