C.E. Alchourrón. Philosophical foundations of deontic logic and the logic of defeasible conditionals. In J.-J. Meyer and R. Wieringa, editors, Deontic Logic in Computer Science: Normative System Specification, pages 43–84. John Wiley & Sons, 1993.
L. Åqvist. Good Samaritans, contrary-to-duty imperatives, and epistemic obligations. Noûs
, 1:361–379, 1967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
C. Boutilier. Conditional logics of normality: a modal approach. Artificial Intelligence
, 68:87–154, 1994.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
A.L. Brown, S. Mantha, and T. Wakayama. Exploiting the normative aspect of preference: a deontic logic without actions. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence
, 9:167–203, 1993.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
B.F. Chellas. Modal Logic: An Introduction. Cambridge University Press, 1980.
R.M. Chisholm. Contrary-to-duty imperatives and deontic logic. Analysis
, 24:33–36, 1963.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
R. Conte and R. Falcone. ICMAS’96: Norms, obligations, and conventions. AI Magazine
, 18,4:145–147, 1997.Google Scholar
B.S. Firozabadhi and L.W.N. van der Torre. Towards an analysis of control systems. In H. Prade, editor, Proceedings of the ECAI’98, pages 317–318, 1998.
J.W. Forrester. Gentle murder, or the adverbial Samaritan. Journal of Philosophy
, 81:193–197, 1984.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
L. Goble. A logic of good, would and should, part 2. Journal of Philosophical Logic
, 19:253–276, 1990.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
L. Goble. Murder most gentle: the paradox deepens. Philosophical Studies
, 64:217–227, 1991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
B. Hansson. An analysis of some deontic logics. In R. Hilpinen, editor, Deontic Logic: Introductionary and Systematic Readings
, pages 121–147. D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, Holland, 1971. Reprint from Noûs
, 1969.Google Scholar
S.O. Hansson. A new semantical approach to the logic of preference. Erkenntnis
, 31:1–42, 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
S.O. Hansson. Defining “good” and “bad” in terms of “better”. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic
, 31:136–149, 1990.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
S.O. Hansson. Preference-based deontic logic (PDL). Journal of Philosophical Logic
, 19:75–93, 1990.CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
S.O. Hansson. Situationist deontic logic. Journal of Philosophical Logic
, 26:423–448, 1997.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
Z. Huang and M. Masuch. The logic of permission and obligation in the framework of ALX3: how to avoid the paradoxes of deontic logic. Logique et Analyse, 149, 1997.
H.G. Hughes and M.J. Creswell. A Companion to Modal Logic. Methuen, London, 1984.
F. Jackson. On the semantics and logic of obligation. Mind
, 94:177–196, 1985.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
R.E. Jennings. Can there be a natural deontic logic? Synthese
, 65:257–274, 1985.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
P. Lamarre. S4 as the conditional logic of nonmonotonicity. In Proceedings of the KR’91, pages 357–367, 1991.
D. Lewis. Counterfactuals
. Blackwell, Oxford, 1973.Google Scholar
D. Lewis. Semantic analysis for dyadic deontic logic. In S. Stunland, editor, Logical Theory and Semantical Analysis
, pages 1–14. D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, Holland, 1974.Google Scholar
B. Loewer and M. Belzer. Dyadic deontic detachment. Synthese
, 54:295–318, 1983.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
J. Pearl. From conditional oughts to qualitative decision theory. In Proceedings of the 9th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (UAI’93), pages 12–20, 1993.
H. Prakken and M.J. Sergot. Contrary-to-duty obligations. Studia Logica
, 57:91–115, 1996.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
H. Prakken and M.J. Sergot. Dyadic deontic logic and contrary-to-duty obligations. In D. Nute, editor, Defeasible Deontic Logic, pages 223–262. Kluwer, 1997.
Y. Moses R. Fagin, J.Y. Halpern and M.Y. Vardi. Reasoning About Knowledge. MIT press, 1995.
S.-W. Tan and J. Pearl. Specification and evaluation of preferences under uncertainty. In Proceedings of the KR’94, pages 530–539, 1994.
Y.-H. Tan and L.W.N. van der Torre. How to combine ordering and minimizing in a deontic logic based on preferences. In Deontic Logic, Agency and Normative Systems. Proceedings of the ΔEON’96, Workshops in Computing, pages 216–232. Springer Verlag, 1996.
L.W.N. van der Torre. Violated obligations in a defeasible deontic logic. In Proceedings of the ECAI’94, pages 371–375, 1994.
L.W.N. van der Torre. Reasoning About Obligations: Defeasibility in Preference-based Deontic Logics. PhD thesis, Erasmus University Rotterdam, 1997.
L.W.N. van der Torre and Y.-H. Tan. Cancelling and overshadowing: two types of defeasibility in defeasible deontic logic. In Proceedings of the IJCAI’95, pages 1525–1532, 1995.
L.W.N. van der Torre and Y.-H. Tan. Contextual deontic logic. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Modeling and Using Context (CONTEXT’ 97)
, pages 1–12, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 1997.Google Scholar
L.W.N. van der Torre and Y.-H. Tan. The many faces of defeasibility in defeasible deontic logic. In D. Nute, editor, Defeasible Deontic Logic, pages 79–121. Kluwer, 1997.
L.W.N. van der Torre and Y.-H. Tan. Diagnosis and decision making in normative reasoning. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 1998.
L.W.N. van der Torre and Y.-H. Tan. The temporal analysis of Chisholm’s paradox. In Proceedings of the AAAI’98, 1998.
L.W.N. van der Torre and Y.-H. Tan. An update semantics for deontic reasoning. In P. McNamara and H. Prakken, editors, Norms, Logics and Information Systems. New Studies on Deontic Logic and Computer Science. IOS Press, 1998.
L.W.N. van der Torre and Y.-H. Tan. An update semantics for prima facie obligations. In H. Prade, editor, Proceedings of the ECAI’98, pages 38–42, 1998.
B.C. van Fraassen. Values and the heart command. Journal of Philosophy
, 70:5–19, 1973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
G.H. von Wright. The Logic of Preference. Edinburgh University Press, 1963.
G.H. von Wright. A new system of deontic logic. In R. Hilpinen, editor, Deontic Logic: Introductory and Systematic Readings
, pages 105–120. D. Reidel Publishing company, Dordrecht, Holland, 1971.Google Scholar
E. Weydert. Hyperrational conditionals. monotonic reasoning about nested default conditionals. In Foundations of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, LNAI 810, pages 310–332. Springer, 1994.
R.J. Wieringa and J.-J.Ch. Meyer. Applications of deontic logic in computer science: A concise overview. In Deontic Logic in Computer Science
, pages 17–40. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, England, 1993.Google Scholar