Selective Credibility-Limited Belief Update

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.28523v1
• Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2026 17:00:38 GMT
• Title: Selective Credibility-Limited Belief Update
• Abstract summary: We introduce selective credibility-limited belief update.<n>We provide semantic and axiomatic characterizations of the resulting class of update operators.<n>These results demonstrate that the framework provides a unified and strictly more expressive account of belief update.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Belief update concerns changes in an agent's beliefs induced by changes in the underlying world. Standard Katsuno-Mendelzon update assumes that an epistemic input can be incorporated from every initially possible world, whereas credibility-limited belief update restricts, for each source world, the successor worlds regarded as credible or reachable. Nevertheless, existing credibility-limited approaches treat the epistemic input as an indivisible whole, and therefore cannot represent cases in which only part of a compound epistemic input can be realized. We introduce selective credibility-limited belief update, in which the epistemic input is transformed, relative to each source world, into a weaker proxy before the credibility-limited transition is performed. We provide semantic and axiomatic characterizations of the resulting class of update operators. We then identify two well-behaved sub-classes; namely, consistency-preserving update operators, which require every transformed epistemic input to be credible from its source world whenever the original epistemic input is consistent, and maximal consistency-preserving update operators, which additionally require the selected proxy to be maximally informative among the credible consequences of the original epistemic input. Finally, we establish the generality of the proposed framework by showing that credibility-limited belief update is recovered as a special case, while Katsuno--Mendelzon belief update emerges when credibility restrictions are removed and the transformation functions are taken to be identities. These results demonstrate that the framework provides a unified and strictly more expressive account of belief update, encompassing established approaches while supporting source-dependent selective acceptance.

Related papers

• COSMO: Consensus-Driven Shift Modulation for Source-Free Domain Adaptation [79.43842208099619]
  Source-free domain adaptation (SFDA) adapts a source-trained model to an unlabeled target domain without source data.<n>We formulate VLM-guided SFDA as a sample-wise reliability-allocation problem.<n>We propose Consensus-Driven Shift Modulation (COSMO) to replace expert-to-expert guidance with co-adaptation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-05T09:10:30Z)
• Explainable Belief Harmonization under Dynamic Epistemic Partitions [0.0]
  This paper presents a formal framework for handling runtime changes in epistemic partitions over continuous belief profiles.<n>A hybrid approach exploits the advantages of answer set programming in elaboration tolerance, declarative integrity constraints, and explanations.<n>It provides formal guarantees of admissibility preservation under refinement, unique mass-preserving repair under coarsening, and explanation completeness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-23T11:22:41Z)
• A Composable CRDT Layer for Byzantine-Resilient Deterministic Reconstruction [0.40611352512781873]
  Conflict-free replicated data types (CRDTs) ensure Strong Even Consistency without coordination.<n>We address this problem through deterministic state reconstruction.<n>We show that its reconstruction model guarantees convergence even under arbitrary update injection.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-17T11:49:13Z)
• CHAL: Council of Hierarchical Agentic Language [0.5156484100374058]
  We argue that the genuine value of debate, and dialectic systems as a whole, lies in defeasible domains.<n>We present the Council ofHierarchical Agentic Language (CHAL), a multi-agent dialectic framework that treats defeasible argumentation as an engine for belief optimization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-12T20:26:41Z)
• The Devil Behind Moltbook: Anthropic Safety is Always Vanishing in Self-Evolving AI Societies [57.387081435669835]
  Multi-agent systems built from large language models offer a promising paradigm for scalable collective intelligence and self-evolution.<n>We show that an agent society satisfying continuous self-evolution, complete isolation, and safety invariance is impossible.<n>We propose several solution directions to alleviate the identified safety concern.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-10T15:18:19Z)
• Illusions of Confidence? Diagnosing LLM Truthfulness via Neighborhood Consistency [78.91846841708586]
  We show that even facts answered with perfect self-consistency can rapidly collapse under mild contextual interference.<n>We propose Neighbor-Consistency Belief (NCB), a structural measure of belief that evaluates response coherence across a conceptual neighborhood.<n>We also present Structure-Aware Training (SAT), which optimize context-invariant belief structure and reduces long-tail knowledge brittleness by approximately 30%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-09T16:23:21Z)
• Information Bargaining: Bilateral Commitment in Bayesian Persuasion [60.3761154043329]
  We introduce a unified framework and a well-structured solution concept for long-term persuasion.<n>This perspective makes explicit the common knowledge of the game structure and grants the receiver comparable commitment capabilities.<n>The framework is validated through a two-stage validation-and-inference paradigm.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-06T08:42:34Z)
• TrustLoRA: Low-Rank Adaptation for Failure Detection under Out-of-distribution Data [62.22804234013273]
  We propose a simple failure detection framework to unify and facilitate classification with rejection under both covariate and semantic shifts.<n>Our key insight is that by separating and consolidating failure-specific reliability knowledge with low-rank adapters, we can enhance the failure detection ability effectively and flexibly.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-20T09:20:55Z)
• All You Need for Counterfactual Explainability Is Principled and Reliable Estimate of Aleatoric and Epistemic Uncertainty [27.344785490275864]
  We argue that transparency research overlooks many foundational concepts of artificial intelligence.<n>Inherently transparent models can benefit from human-centred explanatory insights.<n>At a higher level, integrating artificial intelligence fundamentals into transparency research promises to yield more reliable, robust and understandable predictive models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-24T09:38:31Z)
• Credibility-Limited Revision for Epistemic Spaces [0.0]
  We extend the class of credibility-limited revision operators in a way that all AGM revision operators are included. A semantic characterization of extended credibility-limited revision operators that employ total preorders on possible worlds is presented.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-11T09:15:43Z)
• Generalizability of Adversarial Robustness Under Distribution Shifts [57.767152566761304]
  We take a first step towards investigating the interplay between empirical and certified adversarial robustness on one hand and domain generalization on another. We train robust models on multiple domains and evaluate their accuracy and robustness on an unseen domain. We extend our study to cover a real-world medical application, in which adversarial augmentation significantly boosts the generalization of robustness with minimal effect on clean data accuracy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-09-29T18:25:48Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.