Results 1  10
of
35
Concurrent Dynamic Epistemic Logic
, 2003
"... When giving an nalysis of knowledge in multiagent systems, one needs a framework in which higherorder information and its dynamics can both be represented. A recent tradition stoxting in origina work by Plaza treats all of knowledge, higherorder knowledge, and its dynamics on the sae foot. Our ..."
Abstract

Cited by 160 (30 self)
 Add to MetaCart
When giving an nalysis of knowledge in multiagent systems, one needs a framework in which higherorder information and its dynamics can both be represented. A recent tradition stoxting in origina work by Plaza treats all of knowledge, higherorder knowledge, and its dynamics on the sae foot. Our work is in that tradition. It also fits in approaches that not only dynaize the epistemics, but also epistemize the dynamics: the ac tions that (groups of) agents perform oxe epistemic actions. Different agents may have different information about which action is taking place, including higherorder information. We demonstrate that such information changes require subtle descriptions. Our contribution is to provide a complete axiomatization for n action language of vn Ditmoxsch, where an action is interpreted as a relation between epistemic states (pointed models) and sets of epistemic states. The applicability of the framework is found in every context where multiagent strategic decision making is at stake, and aready demonstrated in gaelike scenoxios such as Cluedo and coxd games.
A Logic for Suspicious Players: Epistemic Actions and BeliefUpdates in Games
, 2000
"... In this paper, we introduce a notion of "epistemic action" to describe changes in the information states of the players in a game. For this, we use ideas that we have developed in our previous papers [BMS], [BMS2] and [B], enriching them to cover, not just purely epistemic actions, but a ..."
Abstract

Cited by 52 (4 self)
 Add to MetaCart
In this paper, we introduce a notion of "epistemic action" to describe changes in the information states of the players in a game. For this, we use ideas that we have developed in our previous papers [BMS], [BMS2] and [B], enriching them to cover, not just purely epistemic actions, but also factchanging actions ("real moves", e.g. choosing a card, exchanging cards etc.) and nondeterministic actions and strategies (conditional actions having knowledge tests as conditions). We consider natural operations with epistemic actions and we use them to describe significant aspects of the interaction between beliefs and actions in a game. For this, we use a logic that combines in a specific way a multiagent epistemic logic with a dynamic logic of "epistemic actions". We give (without proof) a complete and decidable proof system for this logic. As an application, we analyze a specific example of a dialogue game (a version of the Muddy Children Puzzle, in which some of the children can ...
Descriptions of game actions
 JOURNAL OF LOGIC, LANGUAGE AND INFORMATION
, 2002
"... To describe simultaneous knowledge updates for different subgroups we propose an epistemic language with dynamic operators for actions. The language is interpreted on equivalence states (S5 states). The actions are interpreted as state transformers. Two crucial action constructors are learning and ..."
Abstract

Cited by 19 (12 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
To describe simultaneous knowledge updates for different subgroups we propose an epistemic language with dynamic operators for actions. The language is interpreted on equivalence states (S5 states). The actions are interpreted as state transformers. Two crucial action constructors are learning and local choice. Learning is the dynamic equivalent of common knowledge. Local choice aids in constraining the interpretation of an action to a functional interpretation (state transformer). Bisimilarity is preserved under execution of actions. The language is applied to describe various actions in card games.
C&L Intention Revisited
 Proc. 9th Int. Conf. on Principles on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR2004
, 2004
"... The 1990 papers of Cohen and Levesque (C&L) on rational interaction have been most influential. Their approach is based on a logical framework integrating the concepts of belief, action, time, and choice. On top of these they define notions of achievement goal, persistent goal, and intention. We ..."
Abstract

Cited by 16 (8 self)
 Add to MetaCart
The 1990 papers of Cohen and Levesque (C&L) on rational interaction have been most influential. Their approach is based on a logical framework integrating the concepts of belief, action, time, and choice. On top of these they define notions of achievement goal, persistent goal, and intention. We here revisit their approach in a simplified, propositional logic, for which we give complete axiomatization. Within that logic we study the definition of achievement goals, refining C&L’s analysis. Our analysis allows us to identify the conditions under which achievement goals persist. We then discuss the C&L definition of intention as well as a variant that has been proposed by Sadek and Bretier. We argue that both are too strong and propose a weakened version.
The Sasaki hook is not a [static] implicative connective but induces a backward [in time] dynamic one that assigns causes
 Int. Journ. of Theor. Physics
"... In this paper we argue that the Sasaki adjunction, which formally encodes the logicality that different authors tried to attach to the Sasaki hook as a ‘quantum implicative connective’, has a fundamental dynamic nature and encodes the socalled ‘causal duality ’ (Coecke, Moore and Stubbe 2001) for t ..."
Abstract

Cited by 13 (8 self)
 Add to MetaCart
In this paper we argue that the Sasaki adjunction, which formally encodes the logicality that different authors tried to attach to the Sasaki hook as a ‘quantum implicative connective’, has a fundamental dynamic nature and encodes the socalled ‘causal duality ’ (Coecke, Moore and Stubbe 2001) for the particular case of a quantum measurement with a projector as corresponding selfadjoint operator. In particular: The action of the Sasaki hook (a S → −) for fixed antecedent a assigns to some property “the weakest cause before the measurement of actuality of that property after the measurement”, i.e. (a S → b) is the weakest property that guarantees actuality of b after performing the measurement represented by the projector that has the ‘subspace a ’ as eigenstates for eigenvalue 1, say, the measurement that ‘tests ’ a. From this we conclude that the logicality attributable to quantum systems contains a fundamentally dynamic ingredient: Causal duality actually provides a new dynamic interpretation of orthomodularity. We also reconsider the status of the Sasaki hook within ‘dynamic (operational) quantum logic ’ (DOQL), what leads us to the claim made in the title of this paper. More explicitly, although (as many argued in the past) the Sasaki hook should not be seen as an implicative hook, the formal motivation that persuaded others to do so, i.e. the Sasaki adjunction, does have a physical
Modal Probability, Belief, and Actions
, 2003
"... We investigate a modal logic of probability with a unary modal operator expressing that a proposition is more probable than its negation. Such an operator is not closed under conjunction, and its modal logic is therefore nonnormal. Within this framework we study the relation of probability with ot ..."
Abstract

Cited by 6 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We investigate a modal logic of probability with a unary modal operator expressing that a proposition is more probable than its negation. Such an operator is not closed under conjunction, and its modal logic is therefore nonnormal. Within this framework we study the relation of probability with other modal concepts: belief and action. We focus on the evolution of belief, and propose an integration of revision. For that framework we give a regression algorithm.
Logic of Dynamics & Dynamics of Logic; Some Paradigm Examples
"... The development ofoperationalquantum logicpointsoutthatclassicalbooleanstructuresaretoo rigidtodescribe theactualand potentialpropertiesofquantum systems.Operationalquantum logic bearsupon basicaxiomswhich aremotivatedby empiricalfactsand assuch supportsthedynamicshiftfromclassicaltononclassicallog ..."
Abstract

Cited by 6 (5 self)
 Add to MetaCart
The development ofoperationalquantum logicpointsoutthatclassicalbooleanstructuresaretoo rigidtodescribe theactualand potentialpropertiesofquantum systems.Operationalquantum logic bearsupon basicaxiomswhich aremotivatedby empiricalfactsand assuch supportsthedynamicshiftfromclassicaltononclassicallogic resultinginto a dynamicsoflogic.On theotherhand,a dynamic extensionofoperationalquantum logicallows ustoexpressdynamic 1 reasoninginthesensethatwecancapturehow actualpropertiespropagate, includingtheirtemporalcausalstructure.Itisinthissense thatpassingfromstaticoperationalquantum logictodynamicoperationalquantum logicresultsina truelogicofdynamicsthatprovides a unifledlogicaldescriptionofsystemswhich evolve orwhich aresubmittedtomeasurements. Whilefocusingon thequantalesemantics fordynamicoperationalquantum logic,we cananalyzethepointsof difierencewiththeexistingquantalesemanticsfor(non)commutative linearlogic.Linearlogicisheretobeconceivedasa resourcesensitive logiccapableofdealingwi...
The Logic of Knowledge Games: Showing a Card
, 1999
"... Modelling the dynamics of multiagent systems currently gets much attention from the research community, e. g. [Gerbrandy 99], [Fagin et al. 95], [Baltag et al. 99]. Contrary to these more general approaches, we restrict ourselves to finite models, to multiS5 models (as opposed to Kripke models ..."
Abstract

Cited by 4 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Modelling the dynamics of multiagent systems currently gets much attention from the research community, e. g. [Gerbrandy 99], [Fagin et al. 95], [Baltag et al. 99]. Contrary to these more general approaches, we restrict ourselves to finite models, to multiS5 models (as opposed to Kripke models in general), and to dynamics resulting from the proceduralized communication in games. Communication between three or more agents is substantially more complex than between two, because a communicative act can simultaneously have private, subgroup and public aspects. We illustrate this by modelling the act of showing a card in a knowledge game. A knowledge game is a multiperson card game with a fixed dealing of cards. The knowledge of the players is represented by a pointed multiS5 model, called the knowledge state of the game. An action is an operation transforming the knowledge state of the game. We describe all models resulting from show actions in a simple knowledge game, an...