Digitala Vetenskapliga Arkivet

Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
A Basis for AGM Revision in Bayesian Probability Revision
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Arts, Department of Philosophy, Theoreretical Philosophy.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-0071-3919
2023 (English)In: Journal of Philosophical Logic, ISSN 0022-3611, E-ISSN 1573-0433, Vol. 52, no 6, p. 1535-1559Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

In standard Bayesian probability revision, the adoption of full beliefs (propositions with probability 1) is irreversible. Once an agent has full belief in a proposition, no subsequent revision can remove that belief. This is an unrealistic feature, and it also makes probability revision incompatible with belief change theory, which focuses on how the set of full beliefs is modified through both additions and retractions. This problem in probability theory can be solved in a model that (i) lets the codomain of the probability function be a hyperreal-valued rather than the real-valued closed interval [0, 1], and (ii) identifies the full beliefs as the propositions whose probability is either 1 or infinitesimally smaller than 1. In this model, changes in the probability function will result in changes in the set of full beliefs (belief set), which constitutes a submodel that can be conceived as the "tip of the iceberg" within the larger model that also contains beliefs on lower levels of probability. The patterns of change in the set of full beliefs in this modified Bayesian model coincides with the corresponding pattern in a slightly modified version of AGM revision, which is commonly conceived as the gold standard of (dichotomous) belief change. The modification only concerns the marginal case of revision by an inconsistent input sentence. These results show that probability revision and dichotomous belief change can be unified in one and the same framework, or - if we so wish - that belief change theory can be subsumed under a modified version of probability revision that allows for iterated change and for the removal of full beliefs.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Springer, 2023. Vol. 52, no 6, p. 1535-1559
Keywords [en]
Bayesianism, Probability revision, Infinitesimal probabilities, Belief revision, AGM model
National Category
Philosophy
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-522448DOI: 10.1007/s10992-023-09716-5ISI: 001062035300001OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-522448DiVA, id: diva2:1836118
Funder
Swedish Research Council, 2020-01460Uppsala UniversityAvailable from: 2024-02-08 Created: 2024-02-08 Last updated: 2024-02-08Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(416 kB)154 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 416 kBChecksum SHA-512
7aead0c78389ef2518decad505ee0aa8857ddead39ac428a27186e13c2d7da4adb3c16bbcc5ebfb12151f396ca85344912ecf9d3efe06c48a11da0d0e62f3359
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Hansson, Sven Ove
By organisation
Theoreretical Philosophy
In the same journal
Journal of Philosophical Logic
Philosophy

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 154 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 182 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf