Advertisement

Journal of Logic, Language and Information

, Volume 11, Issue 3, pp 349–365 | Cite as

Descriptions of Game Actions

  • Hans P. van Ditmarsch
Article

Abstract

To describe simultaneous knowledge updates for different subgroups we propose anepistemic language with dynamic operators for actions. The language is interpreted onequivalence states (S5 states). The actions are interpreted as state transformers. Two crucial action constructors are learning and local choice. Learning isthe dynamic equivalent of common knowledge. Local choice aids in constraining theinterpretation of an action to a functional interpretation (state transformer).Bisimilarity is preserved under execution of actions. The language is applied todescribe various actions in card games.

action language dynamic epistemics modal logic multiagent systems 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Baltag, A., 1999, “A logic of epistemic actions,” in (electronic) Proceedings of the ESSLLI 1999 Workshop on Foundations and Applications of Collective Agent Based Systems. W. van der Hoek, J.-J. Meyer, and C. Witteveen, eds., Utrecht University.Google Scholar
  2. Baltag, A., Moss, L., and Solecki, S., 2000, “The logic of public announcements, common knowledge and private suspicions,” Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, accepted.Google Scholar
  3. Blackburn, P., de Rijke, M., and Venema, Y., 2001, Modal Logic, Cambridge Tracts in Theoretical Computer Science, Vol. 53, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Fagin, R., Halpern, J., Moses, Y., and Vardi, M., 1995, Reasoning about Knowledge, Cambridge,MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  5. Gerbrandy, J., 1999, “Bisimulations on planet Kripke,” Ph.D. Thesis, University of Amsterdam, ILLC Dissertation Series DS-1999-01.Google Scholar
  6. Gerbrandy, J. and Groeneveld, W., 1997, “Reasoning about information change,” Journal of Logic, Language, and Information 6, 147–169.Google Scholar
  7. Goldblatt, R., 1992, Logics of Time and Computation, 2nd edn., CSLI Lecture Notes, No. 7, Stanford,CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
  8. Harel, D., 1984, “Dynamic logic,” pp. 497–604 in Handbook of Philosophical Logic, Vol. II, D. Gabbay and F. Guenthner, eds., Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  9. Harel, D., Kozen, D., and Tiuryn, J., 2000, Dynamic Logic, Foundations of Computing Series, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  10. Meyer, J.-J. and van der Hoek, W., 1995, Epistemic Logic for AI and Computer Science, Cambridge Tracts in Theoretical Computer Science, Vol. 41, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Parikh, R., 1987, “Knowledge and the problem of logical omniscience,” pp. 432–439 in Proceedings of the 2nd International Symposium on Methodologies for Intelligent Systems, R. Zas and M. Zemankova, eds., Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar
  12. Peleg, D., 1987, “Concurrent dynamic logic,” Journal of the ACM 34, 450–479.Google Scholar
  13. Plaza, J., 1989, “Logics of public communications,” pp. 201–216 in Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Methodologies for Intelligent Systems, M. Emrich, M. Pfeifer, M. Hadzikadic, and Z. Ras, eds., Oak Ridge National Laboratory.Google Scholar
  14. van Ditmarsch, H., 1999, “The logic of knowledge games: Showing a card,” pp. 35–42 in Proceedings of the BNAIC 99, Maastricht University, Maastricht, E. Postma and M. Gyssens, eds.Google Scholar
  15. van Ditmarsch, H., 2000, “Knowledge games,” Ph.D. Thesis, University of Groningen, ILLC Dissertation Series DS-2000-06.Google Scholar
  16. van Ditmarsch, H., 2001a, “Knowledge games,” Bulletin of Economic Research 53, 249–273.Google Scholar
  17. van Ditmarsch, H., 2001b, “The semantics of concurrent knowledge actions,” in (electronic) Proceedings of the ESSLLI 2001 Workshop on Logic and Games, M. Pauly and G. Sandu, eds., University of Helsinki.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hans P. van Ditmarsch
    • 1
  1. 1.Computer ScienceUniversity of OtagoDunedinNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations