Notice: The reproducibility variables underlying each score are classified using an automated LLM-based pipeline, validated against a manually labeled dataset. LLM-based classification introduces uncertainty and potential bias; scores should be interpreted as estimates. Full accuracy metrics and methodology are described in [1].
Incompatibilities Between Iterated and Relevance-Sensitive Belief Revision
Authors: Theofanis Aravanis, Pavlos Peppas, Mary-Anne Williams
JAIR 2020 | Venue PDF | LLM Run Details
| Reproducibility Variable | Result | LLM Response |
|---|---|---|
| Research Type | Theoretical | In particular, we prove that the DP postulates are, in a strong sense, inconsistent with Parikh s relevance-sensitive axiom (P), extending previous initial conflicts. Immediate consequences of this result are that an entire class of intuitive revision operators, which includes Dalal s operator, violates the DP postulates, as well as that the Independence postulate and Spohn s conditionalization are inconsistent with axiom (P). The whole study, essentially, indicates that two fundamental aspects of the revision process, namely, iteration and relevance, are in deep conflict, and opens the discussion for a potential reconciliation towards a comprehensive formal framework for knowledge dynamics. |
| Researcher Affiliation | Academia | Theofanis I. Aravanis EMAIL Pavlos Peppas EMAIL Department of Business Administration School of Economics & Business University of Patras Patras 265 00, Greece Mary-Anne Williams EMAIL Centre for Artificial Intelligence Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology University of Technology Sydney NSW 2007, Australia |
| Pseudocode | No | The paper presents theoretical proofs and logical formalisms, such as definitions, theorems, and proofs (e.g., Definition 1, Theorem 1, Proof of Theorem 3). It does not include any pseudocode or algorithm blocks. |
| Open Source Code | No | The paper focuses on theoretical results and does not describe any computational methodology for which source code would be provided or made available. There is no mention of code release, repositories, or supplementary materials containing code. |
| Open Datasets | No | The paper discusses abstract concepts like 'belief sets', 'propositional variables', and 'possible worlds' within the context of formal logic and belief revision. It does not use or refer to any empirical datasets. |
| Dataset Splits | No | The paper is theoretical and does not utilize any datasets for experiments, thus no dataset splits are described. |
| Hardware Specification | No | This is a theoretical paper presenting logical proofs and formalisms. No experiments were conducted that would require specific hardware, and thus no hardware specifications are mentioned. |
| Software Dependencies | No | The paper describes theoretical work in belief revision and does not involve any experimental setup or software implementation. Therefore, no software dependencies with version numbers are mentioned. |
| Experiment Setup | No | The paper is purely theoretical, focusing on logical incompatibilities and proofs within belief revision. It does not describe any experiments, models, or training procedures that would involve hyperparameters or an experimental setup. |