Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Quantified Degrees of Group Responsibility

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Coordination, Organizations, Institutions, and Norms in Agent Systems XI (COIN 2015)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 9628))

Abstract

This paper builds on an existing notion of group responsibility and proposes two ways to define the degree of group responsibility: structural and functional degrees of responsibility. These notions measure potential responsibilities of agent groups for avoiding a state of affairs. According to these notions, a degree of responsibility for a state of affairs can be assigned to a group of agents if, and to the extent that, the group of the agents have potential to preclude the state of affairs. These notions will be formally specified and their properties will be analyzed.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    See [5] for a detailed discussion on why to focus on avoiding instead of enforcing a state of affairs.

  2. 2.

    In further references, “in M” might be omitted wherever it is clear from the context.

References

  1. Chockler, H., Halpern, J.Y.: Responsibility and blame: a structural-model approach. J. Artif. Intell. Res. (JAIR) 22, 93–115 (2004)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Grossi, D., Royakkers, L.M.M., Dignum, F.: Organizational structure and responsibility. Artif. Intell. Law 15(3), 223–249 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Miller, S.: Collective moral responsibility: An individualist account. Midwest Stud. Philos. 30(1), 176–193 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Braham, M., Van Hees, M.: An anatomy of moral responsibility. Mind 121(483), 601–634 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bulling, N., Dastani, M.: Coalitional responsibility in strategic settings. In: Leite, J., Son, T.C., Torroni, P., van der Torre, L., Woltran, S. (eds.) CLIMA XIV 2013. LNCS, vol. 8143, pp. 172–189. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. van de Poel, I.: The relation between forward-looking and backward-looking responsibility. In: Vincent, N.A., van de Poel, I., van den Hoven, J. (eds.) Moral Responsibility. Library of Ethics and Applied Philosophy, vol. 27, pp. 37–52. Springer, Dordrecht (2011)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Sulzer, J.L.: Attribution of responsibility as a function of the structure, quality, and intensity of the event. Ph.D. thesis, University of Florida (1965)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Shaver, K.: The Attribution of Blame: Causality, Responsibility, and Blameworthiness. Springer, New York (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Miller, N.R.: Power in game forms. In: Holler, M.J. (ed.) Power, Voting, and Voting Power, pp. 33–51. Springer, Würzburg (1982)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Alur, R., Henzinger, T.A., Kupferman, O.: Alternating-time temporal logic. J. ACM 49(5), 672–713 (2002)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Pauly, M.: Logic for social software. Universiteit van Amsterdam (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Kripke, S.A.: Semantical analysis of modal logic i normal modal propositional calculi. Math. Logic Q. 9(5–6), 67–96 (1963)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Turnovec, F.: Monotonicity of power indices. In: Stewart, T., van den Honert, R. (eds.) Trends in Multicriteria Decision Making. Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems, vol. 465, pp. 199–214. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Holler, M.J., Napel, S.: Monotonicity of power and power measures. Theor. Decis. 56(1–2), 93–111 (2004)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Banzhaf III, J.F.: Weighted voting doesn’t work: A mathematical analysis. Rutgers L. Rev. 19, 317 (1964)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Shapley, L.S., Shubik, M.: A method for evaluating the distribution of power in a committee system. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 48(03), 787–792 (1954)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Rahwan, T., Michalak, T.P., Elkind, E., Faliszewski, P., Sroka, J., Wooldridge, M., Jennings, N.R.: Constrained coalition formation. In: Burgard, W., Roth, D. (eds.) Proceedings of the Twenty-Fifth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI 2011, San Francisco, California, USA, 7–11 August 2011. AAAI Press (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Griffiths, N., Luck, M.: Coalition formation through motivation and trust. In: Proceedings of the Second International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, AAMAS, 14–18 July 2003, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, pp. 17–24. ACM (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Chen, T., Lu, J.: Probabilistic alternating-time temporal logic and model checking algorithm. In: Lei, J. (ed.) Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Fuzzy Systems and Knowledge Discovery, FSKD 2007, 24–27 August 2007, Haikou, Hainan, China, vol. 2, pp. 35–39. IEEE Computer Society (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Huang, X., Su, K., Zhang, C.: Probabilistic alternating-time temporal logic of incomplete information and synchronous perfect recall. In: Hoffmann, J., Selman, B. (eds.) Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 22–26 July 2012, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. AAAI Press (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Ågotnes, T., van der Hoek, W., Wooldridge, M.: Quantified coalition logic. Synthese 165(2), 269–294 (2008)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. Pauly, M.: A modal logic for coalitional power in games. J. Log. Comput. 12(1), 149–166 (2002)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands

    Vahid Yazdanpanah & Mehdi Dastani

Authors
  1. Vahid Yazdanpanah
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mehdi Dastani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vahid Yazdanpanah .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Delft University of Technology , Delft, The Netherlands

    Virginia Dignum

  2. IIIA-CSIC , Barcelona, Spain

    Pablo Noriega

  3. Ozyegin University , Istanbul, Turkey

    Murat Sensoy

  4. University of Sao Paulo , Sao Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil

    Jaime Simão Sichman

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Yazdanpanah, V., Dastani, M. (2016). Quantified Degrees of Group Responsibility. In: Dignum, V., Noriega, P., Sensoy, M., Sichman, J. (eds) Coordination, Organizations, Institutions, and Norms in Agent Systems XI. COIN 2015. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 9628. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-42691-4_23

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-42691-4_23

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-42690-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-42691-4

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation