Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Merging DEL and ETL

  • Published:
Journal of Logic, Language and Information Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper surveys the interface between the two major logical trends that describe agents’ intelligent interaction over time: dynamic epistemic logic (DEL) and epistemic temporal logic (ETL). The initial attempt to “merge” DEL and ETL was made in van Benthem et al. (Merging frameworks for interaction: DEL and ETL, 2007) and followed up by van Benthem et al. (J Phil Logic 38(5):491–526, 2009) and Hoshi (Epistemic dynamics and protocol information. Ph.D. thesis, Stanford University Stanford, 2009a). The merged framework provides a systematic comparison between these two logical systems and studies new logics of intelligent interaction. This paper presents the main results and the recent developments at the interface between DEL and ETL.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aumann R. (1976) Agreeing to disagree. The Annals of Statistics 4(6): 1236–1239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balbiani, P., Baltag, A., van Ditmarsch, H., Herzig, A., Hoshi, T., & de Lima (2008). ‘knowable’ as ‘known after an announcement’. Review of Symbolic Logic.

  • Baltag, A., Moss, L., & Solecki, S. (1998). The logic of public announcements, common knowledge and private suspicions. In I. Gilboa (Ed.), Proceedings of the 7th Conference on Theoretical Aspects of Rationality and Knowledge (pp. 43–56).

  • Baltag, A., & Smets, S. (2006). Dynamic belief revision over multi-agent plausibility models. In G. Bonanno, W. van der Hoek, & M. Wooldridge (Eds.), Logic and the Foundations of Game and Decision Theory: Proceedings of LOFT’06, Texts in Logic and Games. (pp. 11–24). Netherlands: Amsterdam University Press.

  • Bonanno G. (2007) Axiomatic characterization of the AGM theory of belief revision in a temporal logic. Artificial Intelligence 171(2–3): 144–160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dégremont, C. (2009). Logics of information and interaction. Ph.D. thesis. Amsterdam: ILLC.

  • Dégremont, C., & Roy, O. (2009). Agreement theorems in dynamic-epistemic logic. In Logic, Rationality, and Interaction, Lecture Notes in Computer Science (vol. 5834, pp. 105–118). Berlin: Springer.

  • Fagin R., Halpern J. Y. (1988) Belief, awareness and limited reasoning. Artificial Intelligence 34: 39–76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fagin R., Halpern J., Moses Y., Vardi M. (1995) Reasoning about knowledge. Synthese library. MIT Press, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman N., Halpern J. (1997) Modeling belief in dynamic systems, part I: Foundations. Artificial Intelligence 95(2): 257–316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerbrandy, J. (1999). Bisimulations on planet kripke. Ph.D. thesis, ILLC.

  • Gerbrandy J., Groeneveld W. (1997) Reasoning about information change. Journal of Logic, Language, and Information 6: 147–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gierasimczuk N. (2009) Bridging learning theory and dynamic epistemic logic. Synthese 169(2): 371–384

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halpern J., van der Meyden R., Vardi M. (2004) Complete axiomatizations for reasoning about knowledge and time. SIAM Journal of Computing 33(2): 674–703

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halpern J., Vardi M. (1989) The complexity of reasoning about knowledge and time. Journal of Computer and System Sciences 38: 195–237

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodkinson I., Reynolds M. (2006) Temporal logic. In: Blackburn P., van Benthem J., Wolter F. (eds) Handbook of modal logic. Elsevier, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoshi, T. (2009a). Epistemic dynamics and protocol information. Ph.D. thesis, Stanford University, Stanford, CA. Published in ILLC Dissertation Series.

  • Hoshi T. (2009b) Public announcement logic with protocol constraints. In: Kurzen L., Velázquez-Quesada F. R. (eds) Logics for dynamics of information and preferences. ILLC, Amsterdam, pp 181–214

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoshi, T., & Pacuit, E. (2009). A dynamic logic of knowledge and access. unpublished manuscript.

  • Hoshi T., Yap A. (2009) Dynamic epistemic logic with branching temporal structures. Synthese 169(2): 259–281

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kooi, B., & Pacuit, E. Logics of rational interaction. In O. Roy, P. Girard, & M. Marion (Eds.), Dynamic epistemology: Contemporary perspectives. (to appear).

  • Parikh, R., & Ramanujam, R. (1985). Distributed processes and the logic of knowledge. InLogic of Programs, Lecture Notes in Computer Science (vol. 193, pp. 256–268). Berlin: Springer.

  • Parikh R., Ramanujam R. (2003) A knowledge based semantics of messages. Journal of Logic, Language, and Information 12: 453–467

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plaza, J. (1989). Logics of public announcements. In Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Methodologies for Intelligent Systems: Poster Session Program (pp. 201–216).

  • Renne, B., Sack, J., Yap, A. (2009). Dynamic epistemic temporal logic. In X. He, J. Horty, E. Pacuit (Eds.) Logic, Rationality, and Interaction, Second International Workshop, LORI 2009, Chongqing, China, October 8–11, 2009, Proceedings, Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Vol. 5834/2009, pp. 263–277). Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer.

  • van Benthem, J. (2002). One is lonely number: On the logic of communication. Technical Report PP-2002-27, University of Amsterdam.

  • van Benthem, J. (2006). One is a lonely number: On the logic of communication. Technical Report PP-2002-27, University of Amsterdam.

  • van Benthem J. (2007) Dynamic logic for belief revision. Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics 17(2): 129–155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Benthem, J., & Dégremont, C. (2008). Multi-agent belief dynamics: Building bridges between dynamic and temporal doxastic logics. Technical Report PP-2008-17, Institution for Logic, Language & Computation.

  • van Benthem, J., Gerbrandy, J., & Pacuit, E. (2007). Merging frameworks for interaction: DEL and ETL.

  • van Benthem J., Gerbrandy J., Hoshi T., Pacuit E. (2009). Merging frameworks for interaction. Journal of Philosophical Logic 38(5): 491–526 To appear.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Benthem J., Liu F. (2004) Diversity of logical agents in games. Philosophia Scientiae 8(2): 163–178

    Google Scholar 

  • van Benthem, J., Pacuit, E. (2006). The tree of knowledge in action: Towards a common perspective. In G. Governatori, I. Hodkinson, Y. Venema (Eds.) Proceedings of Advances in Modal Logic, Vol. 6. London: King’s College Press.

  • van Benthem J., van Eijck J., Kooi B.J. (2006). Logics of communication and change. Information and Computation 204(11):1620–1662.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Ditmarsch H., Ruan J., Verbrugge L. (2007) Sum and product in dynamic epistemic logic. Journal of Logic and Computation 18(4): 563–588

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Ditmarsch H., van der Hoek W., Kooi B. (2007) Dynamic epistemic logic, synthese library, Vol. 337. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Yap A. (2007) Dynamic epistemic logic and temporal modality. University of Victoria, Greater Victoria

    Google Scholar 

  • Yu J. (2009) Formulaic events and local product models in dynamic epistemic logic. In: Kurzen L., Velázquez-Quesada F. R. (eds) Logics for dynamics of information and preferences. ILLC, Amsterdam, pp 280–303

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Philosophy, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA

    Tomohiro Hoshi

Authors
  1. Tomohiro Hoshi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tomohiro Hoshi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hoshi, T. Merging DEL and ETL. J of Log Lang and Inf 19, 413–430 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10849-009-9116-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10849-009-9116-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation