Searching for just a few words should be enough to get started. If you need to make more complex queries, use the tips below to guide you.
Issue title: New Frontiers in Scientific Discovery – Commemorating the Life and Work of Zdzislaw Pawlak
Article type: Research Article
Authors: Chakraborty, Mihir K. | Banerjee, Mohua
Affiliations: Department of Pure Mathematics, University of Calcutta, 35, Ballygunge Circular Road, Kolkata 700 019, India. E-mail: [email protected] | Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur 208 016, India. E-mail: [email protected]
Abstract: A dialogue is an 'activity' by a pair of agents to arrive at some kind of understanding over a concept/belief/piece of information etc. represented by a subset (the extension) in some universe of discourse. The universe is partitioned into two different sets of granules (equivalence classes) representing the perceptions of the agents. So, there are two approximation spaces at the beginning. A third approximation space arises out of superimposition of the two partitions. A dialogue is a finite process of gradual enhancement of the two base subsets of the agents, in their 'common' approximation space. Through this process, various kinds of overlap may emerge between the two final subsets. A first introduction of the idea of a dialogue in rough context was made in [6]. This paper further develops the notion and focusses upon the study of the above-mentioned overlaps in a systematic manner. Given two sets A and B in an approximation space, there are nine possible inclusion relations among the sets lo(A),A, up(A), lo(B),B and up(B) where lo and up denote the lower and upper approximation operators respectively. There are five resulting equivalence classes and the quotient set forms a lattice by implication ordering. That is, of the nine relations, only five are independent and they form an implication or entailment lattice. Starting with this basic lattice other implication lattices are formed. Relationship of these lattices with the various overlap conditions between the final pair of sets arrived at after a dialogue is studied. Finally, examples are given, one of which relates dialogues in rough context with rough belief revision [3] – in a line similar to the approach of [5].
Keywords: Rough sets, Negotiation, Modal system S5, Belief change
Journal: Fundamenta Informaticae, vol. 75, no. 1-4, pp. 123-139, 2007
IOS Press, Inc.
6751 Tepper Drive
Clifton, VA 20124
USA
Tel: +1 703 830 6300
Fax: +1 703 830 2300
[email protected]
For editorial issues, like the status of your submitted paper or proposals, write to [email protected]
IOS Press
Nieuwe Hemweg 6B
1013 BG Amsterdam
The Netherlands
Tel: +31 20 688 3355
Fax: +31 20 687 0091
[email protected]
For editorial issues, permissions, book requests, submissions and proceedings, contact the Amsterdam office [email protected]
Inspirees International (China Office)
Ciyunsi Beili 207(CapitaLand), Bld 1, 7-901
100025, Beijing
China
Free service line: 400 661 8717
Fax: +86 10 8446 7947
[email protected]
For editorial issues, like the status of your submitted paper or proposals, write to [email protected]
如果您在出版方面需要帮助或有任何建, 件至: [email protected]