11 research outputs found

    Alternative axiomatics and complexity of deliberative STIT theories

    Full text link
    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

    Cut-free Calculi and Relational Semantics for Temporal STIT Logics

    Get PDF
    We present cut-free labelled sequent calculi for a central formalism in logics of agency: STIT logics with temporal operators. These include sequent systems for Ldm , Tstit and Xstit. All calculi presented possess essential structural properties such as contraction- and cut-admissibility. The labelled calculi G3Ldm and G3Tstit are shown sound and complete relative to irreflexive temporal frames. Additionally, we extend current results by showing that also Xstit can be characterized through relational frames, omitting the use of BT+AC frames

    Automating Agential Reasoning: Proof-Calculi and Syntactic Decidability for STIT Logics

    Get PDF
    This work provides proof-search algorithms and automated counter-model extraction for a class of STIT logics. With this, we answer an open problem concerning syntactic decision procedures and cut-free calculi for STIT logics. A new class of cut-free complete labelled sequent calculi G3LdmL^m_n, for multi-agent STIT with at most n-many choices, is introduced. We refine the calculi G3LdmL^m_n through the use of propagation rules and demonstrate the admissibility of their structural rules, resulting in auxiliary calculi Ldm^m_nL. In the single-agent case, we show that the refined calculi Ldm^m_nL derive theorems within a restricted class of (forestlike) sequents, allowing us to provide proof-search algorithms that decide single-agent STIT logics. We prove that the proof-search algorithms are correct and terminate

    From BDI and stit to bdi-stit logic

    Get PDF
    Since it is desirable to be able to talk about rational agents forming attitudes toward their concrete agency, we suggest an introduction of doxastic, volitional, and intentional modalities into the multi-agent logic of deliberatively seeing to it that, dstit logic. These modalities are borrowed from the well-known BDI (belief-desire-intention) logic. We change the semantics of the belief and desire operators from a relational one to a monotonic neighbourhood semantic in order to handle ascriptions of conflicting but not inconsistent beliefs and desires as being satisfiable. The proposed bdi-stit logic is defined with respect to branching time frames, and it is shown that this logic is a generalization of a bdi logic based on branching time possible worlds frames (but without temporal operators) and dstit logic. The new bdi-stit logic generalizes bdi and dstit logic in the sense that for any model of bdi or dstit logic, there is an equivalent bdi-stit model

    Expressivity results for deontic logics of collective agency

    Get PDF
    We use a deontic logic of collective agency to study reducibility questions about collective agency and collective obligations. The logic that is at the basis of our study is a multi-modal logic in the tradition of *stit* ('sees to it that') logics of agency. Our full formal language has constants for collective and individual deontic admissibility, modalities for collective and individual agency, and modalities for collective and individual obligations. We classify its twenty-seven sublanguages in terms of their expressive power. This classification enables us to investigate reducibility relations between collective deontic admissibility, collective agency, and collective obligations, on the one hand, and individual deontic admissibility, individual agency, and individual obligations, on the other

    Expressivity results for deontic logics of collective agency

    Get PDF
    We use a deontic logic of collective agency to study reducibility questions about collective agency and collective obligations. The logic that is at the basis of our study is a multi-modal logic in the tradition of *stit* ('sees to it that') logics of agency. Our full formal language has constants for collective and individual deontic admissibility, modalities for collective and individual agency, and modalities for collective and individual obligations. We classify its twenty-seven sublanguages in terms of their expressive power. This classification enables us to investigate reducibility relations between collective deontic admissibility, collective agency, and collective obligations, on the one hand, and individual deontic admissibility, individual agency, and individual obligations, on the other

    Expressivity results for deontic logics of collective agency

    Get PDF
    We use a deontic logic of collective agency to study reducibility questions about collective agency and collective obligations. The logic that is at the basis of our study is a multi-modal logic in the tradition of *stit* ('sees to it that') logics of agency. Our full formal language has constants for collective and individual deontic admissibility, modalities for collective and individual agency, and modalities for collective and individual obligations. We classify its twenty-seven sublanguages in terms of their expressive power. This classification enables us to investigate reducibility relations between collective deontic admissibility, collective agency, and collective obligations, on the one hand, and individual deontic admissibility, individual agency, and individual obligations, on the other

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

    Get PDF
    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

    Seeing, Knowing, doing : case studies in modal logic

    Get PDF
    Dans le domaine des jeux vidĂ©os par exemple, surtout des jeux de rĂŽles, les personnages virtuels perçoivent un environnement, en tirent des connaissances puis effectuent des actions selon leur besoin. De mĂȘme en robotique, un robot perçoit son environnement Ă  l'aide de capteurs/camĂ©ras, Ă©tablit une base de connaissances et effectuent des mouvements etc. La description des comportements de ces agents virtuels et leurs raisonnements peut s'effectuer Ă  l'aide d'un langage logique. Dans cette thĂšse, on se propose de modĂ©liser les trois aspects "voir", "savoir" et "faire" et leurs interactions Ă  l'aide de la logique modale. Dans une premiĂšre partie, on modĂ©lise des agents dans un espace gĂ©omĂ©trique puis on dĂ©finit une relation Ă©pistĂ©mique 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 diffĂ©rence entre les principes "de re" et "de dicto", contrairement Ă  d'autres logiques modales des actions. Dans une troisiĂšme partie, on s'intĂ©resse Ă  modĂ©liser quelques aspects de la thĂ©orie des jeux dans une variante de la logique "STIT" ainsi que des Ă©motions contre-factuelles comme le regret. Tout au long de cette thĂšse, on s'efforcera de s'intĂ©resser aux aspects logiques comme les complĂ©tudes des axiomatisations et la complexitĂ© du problĂšme de satisfiabilitĂ© d'une formule logique. L'intĂ©gration des trois concepts "voir", "savoir" et "faire" dans une et une seule logique est Ă©voquĂ©e 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

    Voir, savoir, faire : une Ă©tude de cas en logique modale

    Get PDF
    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 vidĂ©os par exemple, surtout des jeux de rĂŽles, les personnages virtuels perçoivent un environnement, en tirent des connaissances puis effectuent des actions selon leur besoin. De mĂȘme en robotique, un robot perçoit son environnement Ă  l'aide de capteurs/camĂ©ras, Ă©tablit une base de connaissances et effectuent des mouvements etc. La description des comportements de ces agents virtuels et leurs raisonnements peut s'effectuer Ă  l'aide d'un langage logique. Dans cette thĂšse, on se propose de modĂ©liser les trois aspects ''voir'', ''savoir'' et ''faire'' et leurs interactions Ă  l'aide de la logique modale. Dans une premiĂšre partie, on modĂ©lise des agents dans un espace gĂ©omĂ©trique puis on dĂ©finit une relation Ă©pistĂ©mique 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 diffĂ©rence entre les principes ''de re'' et ''de dicto'', contrairement Ă  d'autres logiques modales des actions. Dans une troisiĂšme partie, on s'intĂ©resse Ă  modĂ©liser quelques aspects de la thĂ©orie des jeux dans une variante de la logique ''STIT'' ainsi que des Ă©motions contre-factuelles comme le regret. Tout au long de cette thĂšse, on s'efforcera de s'intĂ©resser aux aspects logiques comme les complĂ©tudes des axiomatisations et la complexitĂ© du problĂšme de satisfiabilitĂ© d'une formule logique. L'intĂ©gration des trois concepts ''voir'', ''savoir'' et ''faire'' dans une et une seule logique est Ă©voquĂ©e en conclusion et reste une question ouverte
    corecore