Switch to: Citations

Add references

You must login to add references.
  1. Group announcement logic.Thomas Ågotnes, Philippe Balbiani, Hans van Ditmarsch & Pablo Seban - 2010 - Journal of Applied Logic 8 (1):62-81.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   26 citations  
  • Logics of Communication and Change. van Benthem, Johan, van Eijck, Jan & Kooi, Barteld - unknown
    Current dynamic epistemic logics for analyzing effects of informational events often become cumbersome and opaque when common knowledge is added for groups of agents. Still, postconditions involving common knowledge are essential to successful multi-agent communication. We propose new systems that extend the epistemic base language with a new notion of ‘relativized common knowledge’, in such a way that the resulting full dynamic logic of information flow allows for a compositional analysis of all epistemic postconditions via perspicuous ‘reduction axioms’. We also (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   121 citations  
  • (1 other version)Towards a theory of intention revision.Wiebe van der Hoek, Wojciech Jamroga & Michael Wooldridge - 2007 - Synthese 155 (2):265-290.
    Although the change of beliefs in the face of new information has been widely studied with some success, the revision of other mental states has received little attention from the theoretical perspective. In particular, intentions are widely recognised as being a key attitude for rational agents, and while several formal theories of intention have been proposed in the literature, the logic of intention revision has been hardly considered. There are several reasons for this: perhaps most importantly, intentions are very closely (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   18 citations  
  • Hidden protocols: Modifying our expectations in an evolving world.Hans van Ditmarsch, Sujata Ghosh, Rineke Verbrugge & Yanjing Wang - 2014 - Artificial Intelligence 208 (1):18--40.
    When agents know a protocol, this leads them to have expectations about future observations. Agents can update their knowledge by matching their actual observations with the expected ones. They eliminate states where they do not match. In this paper, we study how agents perceive protocols that are not commonly known, and propose a semantics-driven logical framework to reason about knowledge in such scenarios. In particular, we introduce the notion of epistemic expectation models and a propositional dynamic logic-style epistemic logic for (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Logics of public communications.Jan Plaza - 2007 - Synthese 158 (2):165 - 179.
    Multi-modal versions of propositional logics S5 or S4—commonly accepted as logics of knowledge—are capable of describing static states of knowledge but they do not reflect how the knowledge changes after communications among agents. In the present paper (part of broader research on logics of knowledge and communications) we define extensions of the logic S5 which can deal with public communications. The logics have natural semantics. We prove some completeness, decidability and interpretability results and formulate a general method that solves certain (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   186 citations  
  • Quantified epistemic logics for reasoning about knowledge in multi-agent systems.F. Belardinelli & A. Lomuscio - 2009 - Artificial Intelligence 173 (9-10):982-1013.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Arrow update logic.Barteld Kooi & Bryan Renne - 2011 - Review of Symbolic Logic 4 (4):536-559.
    We present Arrow Update Logic, a theory of epistemic access elimination that can be used to reason about multi-agent belief change. While the belief-changing of Arrow Update Logic can be transformed into equivalent belief-changing from the popular Dynamic Epistemic Logic approach, we prove that arrow updates are sometimes exponentially more succinct than action models. Further, since many examples of belief change are naturally thought of from Arrow Update Logicrelativized” common knowledge familiar from the Dynamic Epistemic Logic literature.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   17 citations  
  • 'Knowable' as 'known after an announcement'.Philippe Balbiani, Alexandru Baltag, Hans van Ditmarsch, Andreas Herzig, Tomohiro Hoshi & Tiago de Lima - 2008 - Review of Symbolic Logic 1 (3):305-334.
    Public announcement logic is an extension of multiagent epistemic logic with dynamic operators to model the informational consequences of announcements to the entire group of agents. We propose an extension of public announcement logic with a dynamic modal operator that expresses what is true after any announcement: after which , does it hold that Kφ? We give various semantic results and show completeness for a Hilbert-style axiomatization of this logic. There is a natural generalization to a logic for arbitrary events.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   40 citations  
  • (1 other version)Towards a theory of intention revision.Wiebe van Der Hoek, Wojciech Jamroga & Michael Wooldridge - 2007 - Synthese 155 (2):265-290.
    Although the change of beliefs in the face of new information has been widely studied with some success, the revision of other mental states has received little attention from the theoretical perspective. In particular, intentions are widely recognised as being a key attitude for rational agents, and while several formal theories of intention have been proposed in the literature, the logic of intention revision has been hardly considered. There are several reasons for this: perhaps most importantly, intentions are very closely (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  • What one may come to know.J. van Benthem - 2004 - Analysis 64 (2):95-105.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   51 citations  
  • An integrated framework for ought-to-be and ought-to-do constraints.P. D'Altan, J.-J. Ch Meyer & R. J. Wieringa - 1996 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 4 (2):77-111.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations