Endogenizing Epistemic Actions


Through a series of examples, we illustrate some important drawbacks that the action model logic framework suffers from in its ability to represent the dynamics of information updates. We argue that these problems stem from the fact that the action model, a central construct designed to encode agents’ uncertainty about actions, is itself effectively common knowledge amongst the agents. In response to these difficulties, we motivate and propose an alternative semantics that avoids them by (roughly speaking) endogenizing the action model. We discuss the relationship between this new framework and action model logic, and provide a sound and complete axiomatization of several new logics that naturally arise.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.


  1. 1.

    Baltag, A., and L. S. Moss, Logics for Epistemic Programs, Synthese 139:165–224, 2004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Baltag, A., L.S. Moss, and S. Solecki, The logic of public announcements, common knowledge, and private suspicions, in Proceedings of the conference on Theoretical Aspects of Rationality and Knowledge (TARK), 1998, pp. 43–56.

  3. 3.

    Bjorndahl, A., and W. Nalls, Endogenizing Epistemic Actions, in Proceedings of the conference on Theoretical Aspects of Rationality and Knowledge (TARK), 2017, pp. 426–440.

  4. 4.

    Bolander, T., H. van Ditmarsch, A. Herzig, E. Lorini, P. Pardo, and F. Schwarzentruber, Announcements to Attentive Agents, Journal of Logic, Language, and Information 25:1–25, 2016.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Czelakowski, J., Freedom and Enforcement in Action: A Study in Formal Action Theory, Springer, 2015.

  6. 6.

    Dechesne, F., and Y. Wang, To know or not to know: epistemic approaches to security protocol verification, Synthese 177(1):51–76, 2010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Fagin, R., J.Y. Halpern, and M.Y. Vardi, Reasoning about Knowledge, MIT Press, 1995.

  8. 8.

    Kooi, B., and J. van Benthem, Reduction axioms for epistemic actions, in Advances in Modal Logic, 2004, pp. 197–211.

  9. 9.

    Kooi, B., and E. Pacuit, Logics of Rational Interaction, in P. Girard, O. Roy, and M. Marion, (eds.), Dynamic Formal Epistemology, Springer, Dordrecht, 2011, pp. 5–32.

  10. 10.

    Plaza, J., Logics of Public Communications, Synthese 158:165–179, 2007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Seligman, J., F. Liu, and P. Girard, Facebook and the epistemic logic of friendship, arXiv preprint 1310.6440, 2013.

  12. 12.

    van Benthem, J., J. Gerbrandy, T. Tomohiro, and E. Pacuit, Merging Frameworks for Interaction, Journal of Philosophical Logic 38(5):491–526, 2001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    van Benthem, J., J. van Eijck, and B. Kooi, Common Knowledge in Update Logics, in Proceedings of the conference on Theoretical Aspects of Rationality and Knowledge (TARK), 2005, pp. 253–261.

  14. 14.

    van Ditmarsch, H., W. van der Hoek, and B. Kooi, Dynamic Epistemic Logic, Springer, 2008.

  15. 15.

    van Eijck, J., Reducing Dynamic Epistemic Logic to PDL by Program Transformation, Software Engineering (SEN), 2004.

  16. 16.

    Wang, Y., and Q. Cao, On axiomatizations of public announcement logic, Synthese 190.1: 103–134, 2013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to Will Nalls.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Presented by Jacek Malinowski

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bjorndahl, A., Nalls, W. Endogenizing Epistemic Actions. Stud Logica (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11225-020-09937-8

Download citation


  • Epistemic logic
  • Dynamic epistemic logic
  • Higher-order uncertainty
  • Action model logic