Agency and fictional truth: a formal study on fiction-making

Fictional truth, or truth in fiction/pretense, has been the object of extended scrutiny among philosophers and logicians in recent decades. Comparatively little attention, however, has been paid to its inferential relationships with time and with certain deliberate and contingent human activities, namely, the creation of fictional works. The aim of the paper is to contribute to filling the gap. Toward this goal, a formal framework is outlined that is consistent with a variety of conceptions of fictional truth and based upon a specific formal treatment of time and agency, that of so-called stit logics. Moreover, a complete axiomatic theory of fiction-making TFM is defined, where fiction-making is understood as the exercise of agency and choice in time over what is fictionally true. The language L of TFM is an extension of the language of propositional logic, with the addition of temporal and modal operators. A distinctive feature of L with respect to other modal languages is a variety of operators having to do with fictional truth, including a \u2018fictionality\u2019 operator M (to be read as \u201cit is a fictional truth that\u201d). Some applications of TFM are outlined, and some interesting linguistic and inferential phenomena, which are not so easily dealt with in other frameworks, are accounted for

Alternative axiomatics and complexity of deliberative STIT theories

We propose two alternatives to Xu's axiomatization of the Chellas STIT. The first one also provides an alternative axiomatization of the deliberative STIT. The second one starts from the idea that the historic necessity operator can be defined as an abbreviation of operators of agency, and can thus be eliminated from the logic of the Chellas STIT. The second axiomatization also allows us to establish that the problem of deciding the satisfiability of a STIT formula without temporal operators is NP-complete in the single-agent case, and is NEXPTIME-complete in the multiagent case, both for the deliberative and the Chellas' STIT.Comment: Submitted to the Journal of Philosophical Logic; 13 pages excluding anne

Designing Normative Theories for Ethical and Legal Reasoning: LogiKEy Framework, Methodology, and Tool Support

A framework and methodology---termed LogiKEy---for the design and engineering of ethical reasoners, normative theories and deontic logics is presented. The overall motivation is the development of suitable means for the control and governance of intelligent autonomous systems. LogiKEy's unifying formal framework is based on semantical embeddings of deontic logics, logic combinations and ethico-legal domain theories in expressive classic higher-order logic (HOL). This meta-logical approach enables the provision of powerful tool support in LogiKEy: off-the-shelf theorem provers and model finders for HOL are assisting the LogiKEy designer of ethical intelligent agents to flexibly experiment with underlying logics and their combinations, with ethico-legal domain theories, and with concrete examples---all at the same time. Continuous improvements of these off-the-shelf provers, without further ado, leverage the reasoning performance in LogiKEy. Case studies, in which the LogiKEy framework and methodology has been applied and tested, give evidence that HOL's undecidability often does not hinder efficient experimentation.Comment: 50 pages; 10 figure

Deontic Epistemic stit Logic Distinguishing Modes of `Mens Rea\u27

Most juridical systems contain the principle that an act is only unlaw- ful if the agent conducting the act has a `guilty mind\u27 (`mens rea\u27). Dif- ferent law systems distinguish different modes of mens rea. For instance, American law distinguishes between `knowingly\u27 performing a criminal act, `recklessness\u27, `strict liability\u27, etc. I will show we can formalize several of these categories. The formalism I use is a complete stit-logic featuring operators for stit-actions taking effect in `next\u27 states, S5-knowledge op- erators and SDL-type obligation operators. The different modes of `mens rea\u27 correspond to the violation conditions of different types of obligation definable in the logic

A Logic of Knowing How

In this paper, we propose a single-agent modal logic framework for reasoning about goal-direct "knowing how" based on ideas from linguistics, philosophy, modal logic and automated planning. We first define a modal language to express "I know how to guarantee phi given psi" with a semantics not based on standard epistemic models but labelled transition systems that represent the agent's knowledge of his own abilities. A sound and complete proof system is given to capture the valid reasoning patterns about "knowing how" where the most important axiom suggests its compositional nature.Comment: 14 pages, a 12-page version accepted by LORI

Seeing, Knowing, doing : case studies in modal logic

Dans le domaine des jeux vidéos par exemple, surtout des jeux de rôles, les personnages virtuels perçoivent un environnement, en tirent des connaissances puis effectuent des actions selon leur besoin. De même en robotique, un robot perçoit son environnement à l'aide de capteurs/caméras, établit une base de connaissances et effectuent des mouvements etc. La description des comportements de ces agents virtuels et leurs raisonnements peut s'effectuer à l'aide d'un langage logique. Dans cette thèse, on se propose de modéliser les trois aspects "voir", "savoir" et "faire" et leurs interactions à l'aide de la logique modale. Dans une première partie, on modélise des agents dans un espace géométrique puis on définit une relation épistémique qui tient compte des positions et du regard des agents. Dans une seconde partie, on revisite la logique des actions "STIT" (see-to-it-that ou "faire en sorte que") qui permet de faire la différence entre les principes "de re" et "de dicto", contrairement à d'autres logiques modales des actions. Dans une troisième partie, on s'intéresse à modéliser quelques aspects de la théorie des jeux dans une variante de la logique "STIT" ainsi que des émotions contre-factuelles comme le regret. Tout au long de cette thèse, on s'efforcera de s'intéresser aux aspects logiques comme les complétudes des axiomatisations et la complexité du problème de satisfiabilité d'une formule logique. L'intégration des trois concepts "voir", "savoir" et "faire" dans une et une seule logique est évoquée en conclusion et reste une question ouverte.Agents are entities who perceive their environment and who perform actions. For instance in role playing video games, ennemies are agents who perceive some part of the virtual world and who can attack or launch a sortilege. Another example may concern robot assistance for disabled people: the robot perceives obstacles of the world and can alert humans or help them. Here, we try to give formal tools to model knowledge reasoning about the perception of their environment and about actions based, on modal logic. First, we give combine the standard epistemic modal logic with perception constructions of the form (agent a sees agent b). We give a semantics in terms of position and orientation of the agents in the space that can be a line (Lineland) or a plane (Flatland). Concerning Lineland, we provide a complete axiomatization and an optimal procedure for model-checking and satisfiability problem. Concerning Flatland, we show that both model-checking and satisfiability problem are decidable but the exact complexities and the axiomatization remain open problems. Thus, the logics of Lineland and Flatland are completely a new approach: their syntax is epistemic but their semantics concern spatial reasoning. Secondly, we study on the logic of agency ``see-to-it-that'' STIT made up of construction of the form [J]A standing for ``the coalition of agents J sees to it that A''. Our interest is motivated: STIT is strictly more expressive that standard modal logic for agency like Coalition Logic CL or Alternating-time Temporal Logic ATL. In CL or ATL the ``de re'' and ``de dicto'' problem is quite difficult and technical whereas if we combine STIT-operators with epistemic operators, we can solve it in a natural way. However this strong expressivity has a prize: the general version of STIT is undecidable. That is why we focus on some syntactic fragments of STIT: either we restrict the allowed coalitions J in constructions [J]A or we restrict the nesting of modal STIT-operators. We provide axiomatizations and complexity results. Finally, we give flavour to epistemic modal logic by adding STIT-operators. The logic STIT is suitable to express counterfactual statements like ``agent a could have choosen an action such that A have been true''. Thus we show how to model counterfactual emotions like regret, rejoicing, disappointment and elation in this framework. We also model epistemic games by adapting the logic STIT by giving explicitely names of actions in the language. In this framework, we can model the notion of rational agents but other kind of behaviour like altruism etc., Nash equilibrium and iterated deletion of strictly dominated strategies

Logics of knowledge and action: critical analysis and challenges

International audienceWe overview the most prominent logics of knowledge and action that were proposed and studied in the multiagent systems literature. We classify them according to these two dimensions, knowledge and action, and moreover introduce a distinction between individual knowledge and group knowledge, and between a nonstrategic an a strategic interpretation of action operators. For each of the logics in our classification we highlight problematic properties. They indicate weaknesses in the design of these logics and call into question their suitability to represent knowledge and reason about it. This leads to a list of research challenges

A logical analysis of responsibility attribution : emotions, individuals and collectives

International audienceThe aim of this article is to provide a logical analysis of the concept of responsibility attribution; that is, how agents ascribe responsibility about the consequences of actions, either to themselves or to other agents. The article is divided in two parts. The first part investigates the importance of the concept of responsibility attribution for emotion theory in general and, in particular, for the theory of attribution emotions such as guilt, pride, moral approval and moral disapproval. The second part explores the collective dimension of responsibility attribution and attribution emotions, namely the concepts of collective responsibility and collective guilt. The proposed analysis is based on an extension of the logic STIT (the logic of ‘Seeing To It That’) with three different types of knowledge and common knowledge modal operators depending on the time of choice: before one’s choice, after one’s choice but before knowing the choices of other agents, and after the choices of all agents have become public. Decidability of the satisfiability problem of the logic is studied in the article