Collective agency:From philosophical and logical perspectives

People inhabit a vast and intricate social network nowadays. In addition to our own decisions and actions, we confront those of various groups every day. Collective decisions and actions are more complex and bewildering compared to those made by individuals. As members of a collective, we contribute to its decisions, but our contributions may not always align with the outcome. We may also find ourselves excluded from certain groups and passively subjected to their influences without being aware of the source. We are used to being in overlapping groups and may switch identities, supporting or opposing the claims of particular groups. But rarely do we pause to think: What do we talk about when we talk about groups and their decisions?At the heart of this dissertation is the question of collective agency, i.e., in what sense can we treat a group as a rational agent capable of its action. There are two perspectives we take: a philosophical and logical one. The philosophical perspective mainly discusses the ontological and epistemological issues related to collective agency, sorts out the relevant philosophical history, and argues that the combination of a relational view of collective agency and a dispositional view of collective intentionality provides a rational and realistic account. The logical perspective is associated with formal theories of groups, it disregards the psychological content involved in the philosophical perspective, establishes a logical system that is sufficiently formal and objective, and axiomatizes the nature of a collective

On Proportionate and Truthful International Alliance Contributions: An Analysis of Incentive Compatible Cost Sharing Mechanisms to Burden Sharing

Burden sharing within an international alliance is a contentious topic, especially in the current geopolitical environment, that in practice is generally imposed by a central authority\u27s perception of its members\u27 abilities to contribute. Instead, we propose a cost sharing mechanism such that burden shares are allocated to nations based on their honest declarations of the alliance\u27s worth. Specifically, we develop a set of multiobjective nonlinear optimization problem formulations that respectively impose Bayesian Incentive Compatible (BIC), Strategyproof (SP), and Group Strategyproof (GSP) mechanisms based on probabilistic inspection efforts and deception penalties that are budget balanced and in the core. Any feasible solution to these problems corresponds to a single stage Bayesian stochastic game wherein a collectively honest declaration is a Bayes-Nash equilibrium, a Nash Equilibrium in dominant strategies, or a collusion resistant Nash equilibrium, respectively, but the optimal solution considers the alliance\u27s central authority preferences. Each formulation is shown to be a nonconvex optimization problem. The solution quality and computational effort required for three heuristic algorithms as well as the BARON global solver are analyzed to determine the superlative solution methodology for each problem. The Pareto fronts associated with each multiobjective optimization problem are examined to determine the tradeoff between inspection frequency and penalty severity required to obtain truthfulness under stronger assumptions. Memory limitations are examined to ascertain the size of alliances for which the proposed methodology can be utilized. Finally, a full block design experiment considering the clustering of available alliance valuations and the member nations\u27 probability distributions therein is executed on an intermediate-sized alliance motivated by the South American alliance UNASUR

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

New Perspectives on Games and Interaction

This volume is a collection of papers presented at the 2007 colloquium on new perspectives on games and interaction at the Royal Dutch Academy of Sciences in Amsterdam. The purpose of the colloquium was to clarify the uses of the concepts of game theory, and to identify promising new directions. This important collection testifies to the growing importance of game theory as a tool to capture the concepts of strategy, interaction, argumentation, communication, cooperation and competition. Also, it provides evidence for the richness of game theory and for its impressive and growing application

Game Theory Relaunched

The game is on. Do you know how to play? Game theory sets out to explore what can be said about making decisions which go beyond accepting the rules of a game. Since 1942, a well elaborated mathematical apparatus has been developed to do so; but there is more. During the last three decades game theoretic reasoning has popped up in many other fields as well - from engineering to biology and psychology. New simulation tools and network analysis have made game theory omnipresent these days. This book collects recent research papers in game theory, which come from diverse scientific communities all across the world; they combine many different fields like economics, politics, history, engineering, mathematics, physics, and psychology. All of them have as a common denominator some method of game theory. Enjoy

Voir, savoir, faire : une étude de cas en logique modale

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.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