In recent years, much work has been dedicated by logicians, computer scientists and economists to understanding awareness, as its importance for human behaviour becomes evident. Although several logics of awareness have been proposed, little attention has been explicitly dedicated to change in awareness. However, one of the most crucial aspects of awareness is the changes it undergoes, which have countless important consequences for knowledge and action. The aim of this paper is to propose a formal model of awareness change, and to derive from it logics of awareness change. In the first part of the paper, the model of epistemic states of bounded agents proposed in Hill (Stud Log 89(1):81–109, 2008a) is extended with operations modelling awareness change. In the second part of the paper, it is shown how this model naturally extends the “standard” logic of awareness to yield a logic of awareness change.
KeywordsAwareness Knowledge Logic of awareness Awareness change Belief revision AGM belief revision Dynamic epistemic logic
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.Baltag, A., & Smets, S. (2006). Dynamic belief revision over multi-agent plausibility models. In G. Bonanno, W. van der Hoek, & M. Wooldridge (Eds.), Proceedings of the 6th conference on logic and the foundations of game and decision theory (LOFT06) (pp. 11–24).Google Scholar
- 3.Blackburn, P., Rijke, M. d., & Venema, Y. (2001). Modal logic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- 4.Board, O. J., Chung, K.-S., & Shipper, B. C. (2009). Two models of awareness: Comparing the object-based and the subjective-state-space approaches. In G. Bonanno, B. Loewe, & W. van der Hoek (Eds.), Proceedings of the 8th conference on logic and the foundations of the game and decision theory (LOFT’08). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
- 6.Fagin, R., Halpern, J. Y., Moses, Y., & Vardi, M. Y. (1995). Reasoning about knowledge. Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
- 8.Gärdenfors, P. (1988). Knowledge in flux : Modeling the dynamics of epistemic states. Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
- 10.Halpern, J. Y., & Rêgo, L. C. (2007). Generalized solution concepts in games with possibly unaware players. In Proceedings of the eleventh conference on theoretical aspects of rationality and knowledge (pp. 253–262).Google Scholar
- 14.Heifetz, A., Meier, M., & Schipper, B. (2008b). Dynamic awareness and rationalizable behavior. Mimeo.Google Scholar
- 17.Koppelberg, S. (1989). General theory of boolean algebras. In J.D. Monk & R. Bonnet (Eds.), Handbook of Boolean Algebras, vol 1. Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar
- 21.van Ditmarsch, H., van der Hoek, W., & Kooi, B. (2007). Dynamic epistemic logic. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar