Synthese

, Volume 185, Supplement 1, pp 43–82 | Cite as

Multi-agent Justification Logic: communication and evidence elimination

Open Access
Article

Abstract

This paper presents a logic combining Dynamic Epistemic Logic, a framework for reasoning about multi-agent communication, with a new multi-agent version of Justification Logic, a framework for reasoning about evidence and justification. This novel combination incorporates a new kind of multi-agent evidence elimination that cleanly meshes with the multi-agent communications from Dynamic Epistemic Logic, resulting in a system for reasoning about multi-agent communication and evidence elimination for groups of interacting rational agents.

Keywords

Justification Logic Dynamic Epistemic Logic Evidence elimination 

References

  1. Artemov S. (2001) Explicit provability and constructive semantics. The Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 7(1): 1–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Artemov S. (2008) The logic of justification. The Review of Symbolic Logic 1(4): 477–513CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Artemov S., Nogina E. (2005) Introducing justification into epistemic logic. Journal of Logic and Computation 15(6): 1059–1073CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baltag A., Moss L. S. (2004) Logics for epistemic programs. Synthese 139(2): 165–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baltag, A., Moss, L. S., & Solecki, S. (1998). The logic of common knowledge, public announcements, and private suspicions. In: I. Gilboa (Ed.), Proceedings of the 7th conference on theoretical aspects of rationality and knowledge (TARK VII), Evanston, IL, USA. (pp. 43–56).Google Scholar
  6. Baltag A., & Smets S. (2007). A qualitative theory of dynamic interactive belief revision. In G. Bonanno, W. van der Hoek, & M. Wooldridge (Eds.), Selected papers from LOFT’06.Google Scholar
  7. Baltag A., van Ditmarsch H. P., Moss L. S. (2008) Epistemic logic and information update. In: Adriaans P., Benthem J. (eds) Handbook on the philosophy of information. Elsevier, Dordrecht, pp 369–463Google Scholar
  8. Blackburn P., de Rijke M., Venema Y. (2001) Modal logic. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  9. Bucheli, S., Kuznets, R., Sack, J., & Studer, T. (2010). Justified belief change. In X. Arrazola, & M. Ponte (Eds.), Proceedings of the second ILCLI international workshop on logic and philosophy of knowledge, communication, and action (LogKCA-10).Google Scholar
  10. Bucheli, S., Kuznets, R., Studer, T. (2011). Partial realization in dynamic justification logic. In L. Beklemishev, & R. de Queiroz (Eds.), Logic, language, information and computation (Vol. 6642, pp. 35–51). Lecture notes in computer science. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  11. Fitting M. (2005) The logic of proofs, semantically. Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 132(1): 1–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fitting M. (2009) Reasoning with justifications. In: Makinson D., Malinowski J., Wansing H. (eds) Towards mathematical philosophy, vol. 28 of trends in logic. Springer, Netherlands, pp 107–123Google Scholar
  13. Gerbrandy, J. (1999). Bisimulations on Planet Kripke. Ph.D. thesis, Institute for Logic, Language, and Computation, University of Amsterdam. ILLC Dissertation Series DS-1999-01.Google Scholar
  14. Gerbrandy J., Groeneveld W. (1997) Reasoning about information change. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 6(2): 147–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kuznets, R. (2008). Complexity issues in justification logic. Ph.D. thesis, CUNY Ph.D. Program in Computer Science.Google Scholar
  16. Mkrtychev, A. (1997). Models for the logic of proofs. In S. Adian & A. Nerode (Eds.), Logical foundations of computer science (Vol. 1234, pp. 266–275). Lecture notes in computer science.Google Scholar
  17. Plaza, J. (1989). Logics of public communications. In Z. W. Ras (Ed.), Proceedings of the fourth international symposium on methodologies for intelligent systems (ISMIS 1989), North-Holland.Google Scholar
  18. Plaza, J. (2007). Logics of public communications. Synthese 158(2), 165–179. Reprint of Plaza (1989).Google Scholar
  19. Renne B. (2006) Public and private communication are different: Results on relative expressivity. Synthese 165(2): 225–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Renne, B. (2008a). Dynamic Epistemic Logic with justification. Ph.D. thesis, The City University of New York.Google Scholar
  21. Renne, B. (2008b). A survey of dynamic epistemic logic. Manuscript.Google Scholar
  22. Renne, B. (2011) Simple evidence elimination in justification logic. In P. Girard, O. Roy, & M. Marion (Eds.), Dynamic formal epistemology. (Vol. 351, Chap. 7, pp. 127–149). Synthese library. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  23. van Benthem J. (2004) Dynamic logic for belief revision. Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics 14(2): 129–155Google Scholar
  24. van Benthem, J. (2006). One is a lonely number: Logic and communication. In: Z. Chatzidakis, P. Koepke, & W. Pohlers (Eds.), Logic colloquium ’02 (Vol. 27). Lecture notes in logic. Association for Symbolic Logic.Google Scholar
  25. van Benthem J., Liu F. (2007) Dynamic logic of preference updgrade. Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics 17(2): 157–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. van Benthem, J., & Pacuit, E. (2011). Dynamic logics of evidence-based belief. Manuscript.Google Scholar
  27. van Benthem J., van Eijck J., Kooi B. (2006) Logics of communication and change. Information and Computation 204(11): 1620–1662CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. van Ditmarsch H., van der Hoek W., Kooi B. (2007) Dynamic Epistemic Logic. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  29. Velázquez-Quesada F. R. (2009) Inference and update. Synthese 169: 283–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Yavorskaya (Sidon) T. (2008) Interacting explicit evidence systems. Theory of Computing Systems 43: 272–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of PhilosophyUniversity of GroningenGroningenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations