We present an approach to reasoning from statistical and subjective knowledge, which is based on a combination of probabilistic reasoning from conditional constraints with approaches to default reasoning from conditional knowledge bases. More precisely, we introduce the notions of -, lexicographic, and conditional entailment for conditional constraints, which are probabilistic generalizations of Pearl's entailment in system , Lehmann's lexicographic entailment, and Geffner's conditional entailment, respectively. We show that the new formalisms have nice properties. In particular, they show a similar behavior as referenceclass reasoning in a number of uncontroversial examples. The new formalisms, however, also avoid many drawbacks of reference-class reasoning. More precisely, they can handle complex scenarios and even purely probabilistic subjective knowledge as input. Moreover, conclusions are drawn in a global way from all the available knowledge as a whole. We then show that the new formalisms also have nice general nonmonotonic properties. In detail, the new notions of -, lexicographic, and conditional entailment have similar properties as their classical counterparts. In particular, they all satisfy the rationality postulates proposed by Kraus, Lehmann, and Magidor, and they have some general irrelevance and direct inference properties. Moreover, the new notions of - and lexicographic entailment satisfy the property of rational monotonicity. Furthermore, the new notions of -, lexicographic, and conditional entailment are proper generalizations of both their classical counterparts and the classical notion of logical entailment for conditional constraints. Finally, we provide algorithms for reasoning under the new formalisms, and we analyze its computational com...

We study probabilistic logic under the viewpoint of the coherence principle of de Finetti. In detail, we explore the relationship between coherence-based and classical modeltheoretic probabilistic logic. Interestingly, we show that the notions of g-coherence and of g-coherent entailment can be expressed by combining notions in model-theoretic probabilistic logic with concepts from default reasoning. Using these results, we analyze the computational complexity of probabilistic reasoning under coherence. Moreover, we present new algorithms for deciding g-coherence and for computing tight g-coherent intervals, which reduce these tasks to standard reasoning tasks in model-theoretic probabilistic logic. Thus, efficient techniques for model-theoretic probabilistic reasoning can immediately be applied for probabilistic reasoning under coherence, for example, column generation techniques. We then describe two other interesting techniques for efficient model-theoretic probabilistic reasoning in the conjunctive case.

Recently, it has been shown that probabilistic entailment under coherence is weaker than model-theoretic probabilistic entailment. Moreover, probabilistic entailment under coherence is a generalization of default entailment in System P. In this paper, we continue this line of research by presenting probabilistic generalizations of more sophisticated notions of classical default entailment that lie between model-theoretic probabilistic entailment and probabilistic entailment under coherence. That is, the new formalisms properly generalize their counterparts in classical default reasoning, they are weaker than model-theoretic probabilistic entailment, and they are stronger than probabilistic entailment under coherence. The new formalisms are useful especially for handling probabilistic inconsistencies related to conditioning on zero events. They can also be applied for probabilistic belief revision. More generally, in the same spirit as a similar previous paper, this paper sheds light on exciting new formalisms for probabilistic reasoning beyond the well-known standard ones.

An accepted belief is a proposition considered likely enough by an agent, to be inferred from as if it were true. This paper bridges the gap between probabilistic and logical representations of accepted beliefs. To this end, natural properties of relations on propositions, describing relative strength of belief are augmented with some conditions ensuring that accepted beliefs form a deductively closed set. This requirement turns out to be very restrictive. In particular, it is shown that the sets of accepted belief of an agent can always be derived from a family of possibility rankings of states. An agent accepts a proposition in a given context if this proposition is considered more possible than its negation in this context, for all possibility rankings in the family. These results are closely connected to the non-monotonic 'preferential' inference system of Kraus, Lehmann and Magidor and the so-called plausibility functions of Friedman and Halpern. The extent to which probability theory is compatible with acceptance relations is laid bare. A solution to the lottery paradox, which is considered as a major impediment to the use of non-monotonic inference is proposed using a special kind of probabilities (called lexicographic, or big-stepped). The setting of acceptance relations also proposes another way of approaching the theory of belief change after the works of Gärdenfors and colleagues. Our view considers the acceptance relation as a primitive object from which belief sets are derived in various contexts. 1.

Nonmonotonic logics allow—contrary to classical (monotone) logics— for withdrawing conclusions in the light of new evidence. Nonmonotonic reasoning is often claimed to mimic human common sense reasoning. Only a few studies, though, have investigated this claim empirically. system p is a central, broadly accepted nonmonotonic reasoning system that proposes basic rationality postulates. We previously investigated empirically a probabilistic interpretation of three selected rules of system p. We found a relatively good agreement of human reasoning and principles of nonmonotonic reasoning according to the coherence interpretation of system p. This study reports an experiment on the cautious monotonicity Rule and its “incautious ” counterpart that is not contained in system p, namely the monotonicity Rule. In accordance with our previous results, the data suggest that people reason nonmonotonically: the subjects in the cautious monotonicity condition infer significantly tighter intervals close to the coherence interpretation of system p compared with the subjects in the incautious monotonicity condition where rather wide (and hence non-informative) intervals are inferred. 1

An important field of probability logic is the investigation of inference rules that propagate point probabilities or, more generally, interval probabilities from premises to conclusions. Conditional probability logic (CPL) interprets the common sense expressions of the form “if..., then... ” by conditional probabilities and not by the probability of the material implication. An inference rule is probabilistically informative if the coherent probability interval of its conclusion is not necessarily equal to the unit interval [0, 1]. Not all logically valid inference rules are probabilistically informative and vice versa. The relationship between logically valid and probabilistically informative inference rules is discussed and illustrated by examples such as the modus ponens or the affirming the consequent. We propose a method to evaluate the strength of CPL inference rules. Finally, an example of a proof is given that is purely based on CPL inference rules.

We present new probabilistic generalizations of Pearl’s entailment in System

This paper examines definitions of independence for events and variables in the context of full conditional measures; that is, when conditional probability is a primitive notion and conditioning is allowed on null events. Several independence concepts are evaluated with respect to graphoid properties; we show that properties of weak union, contraction and intersection may fail when null events are present. We propose a concept of “full” independence, characterize the form of a full conditional measure under full independence, and suggest how to build a theory of Bayesian networks that accommodates null events.

Abstract. We call a conditional model any set of statements made of conditional probabilities or expectations. We take conditional models as primitive compared to unconditional probability, in the sense that conditional statements do not need to be derived from an unconditional probability. We focus on two problems: (coherence) giving conditions to guarantee that a conditional model is self-consistent; (inference) delivering methods to derive new probabilistic statements from a self-consistent conditional model. We address these problems in the case where the probabilistic statements can be specified imprecisely through sets of probabilities, while restricting the attention to finite spaces of possibilities. Using Walley’s theory of coherent lower previsions, we fully characterise the question of coherence, and specialise it for the case of precisely specified probabilities, which is the most common case addressed in the literature. This shows that coherent conditional models are equivalent to sequences of (possibly sets of) unconditional mass functions. In turn, this implies that the inferences from a conditional model are the limits of the conditional inferences obtained by applying Bayes ’ rule, when possible, to the elements of the sequence. In doing so, we unveil the tight connection between conditional models and zero-probability events. 1.

Abstract. In previous work, I have presented approaches to nonmonotonic probabilistic reasoning, which is a probabilistic generalization of default reasoning from conditional knowledge bases. In this paper, I continue this exciting line of research. I present a new probabilistic generalization of Lehmann’s lexicographic entailment, called ¡£¢¥¤§ ¦-entailment, which is parameterized through a value ¨�©� � ���¥�� � that describes the strength of the inheritance of purely probabilistic knowledge. Roughly, the new notion of entailment is obtained from logical entailment in model-theoretic probabilistic logic by adding (i) the inheritance of purely probabilistic knowledge of strength ¨ , and (ii) a mechanism for resolving inconsistencies due to the inheritance of logical and purely probabilistic knowledge. I also explore the semantic properties of ¡£¢¥¤§ ¦-entailment. 1