DagSemProc.05321.8.pdf
- Filesize: 214 kB
- 14 pages
Document
Belief merging, judgment aggregation and some links with social choice theory
Authors
-
Part of:
Volume:
Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings, Volume 5321
Series: Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings (DagSemProc) - License:
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license
- Publication Date: 2005-11-21
Cite As Get BibTex
Daniel Eckert and Gabriella Pigozzi. Belief merging, judgment aggregation and some links with social choice theory. In Belief Change in Rational Agents: Perspectives from Artificial Intelligence, Philosophy, and Economics. Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings, Volume 5321, pp. 1-14, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2005)
https://doi.org/10.4230/DagSemProc.05321.8
Abstract
In this paper we explore the relation between three areas: judgment aggregation, belief merging and social choice theory. Judgment aggregation studies how to aggregate individual judgments on logically interconnected propositions into a collective decision on the same propositions. When majority voting is applied to some propositions (the premises) it may however give a different outcome than majority voting applied to another set of propositions (the conclusion). Starting from this so-called doctrinal paradox, the paper surveys the literature on judgment aggregation (and its relation to preference aggregation), and shows that the application of a well known belief merging operator can dissolve the paradox. Finally, the use of distances is shown to establish a link between belief merging and preference aggregation in social choice theory.
Subject Classification
Keywords
- Judgment aggregation
- belief merging
- preference aggregation
- social choice theory
Metrics
- Access Statistics
-
Total Accesses (updated on a weekly basis)
0PDF Downloads