Titlebook: Belief Revision meets Philosophy of Science; Erik J. Olsson,Sebastian Enqvist Book 2011 Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011 AGM Theo

Ballad

DEMN

Reasoning About Belief Revision,research program co-exists with another major research program concerned with the belief and knowledge of rational agents, namely doxastic and epistemic logic. With respect to epistemic logic, in . (1988), Peter G?rdenfors remarked:

resuscitation

排名真古怪

SHOCK

Changing the Scientific Corpus,ely the dynamics of changes in scientific knowledge. But in spite of this connection, there has been relatively little contact between the two disciplines. There is an obvious reason for this lack of contact: The standard framework that is used in the belief change literature is not suitable for ana

Gingivitis

Idealizations, Intertheory Explanations and Conditionals, point of view of a successor theory, its predecessor theory’s success (where it is successful) as well as the latter’s failure (where it fails) at the same time. A variation of the Ramsey-test is used, together with a standard AGM belief revision model, to give a semantics for open and counterfactu

蛙鳴聲

Abductive Belief Revision in Science, hypotheses from new evidences. After a discussion of two approaches to implement such learning mechanisms into input-driven belief revision, and of alternative accounts in terms of deliberate belief revision, an account of input-driven abductive belief expansion and revision is develop which intend

jagged

EXUDE

假設(shè)

A Note on Theory Change and Belief Revision,w has been repeatedly challenged, with structures, capacities, mechanisms, and perhaps also ontologies and processes competing to take the place of laws. But rather than taking part in that debate, I wish to look into a matter that is epistemologically prior to it, namely how various sciences select