A Formal Model for Epistemic Interactions

  • Paweł Garbacz
  • Piotr Kulicki
  • Marek Lechniak
  • Robert Trypuz
Part of the Studies in Computational Intelligence book series (SCI, volume 244)


The conceptual world of AI is inhabited by a number of epistemic puzzles whose role is to provide a test harness environment for various methods and algorithms. In our paper we focus on those puzzles in which agents either collaborate or compete with one another in order to adopt their epistemological situations to their environment. Our goal is to devise a formal model for epistemic interactions and a family of reasoning mechanisms that would solve those puzzles. Once specified in the abstract manner, they are implemented in the Prolog environment.


knowledge representation ontology epistemic change 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Barwise, J.: Scenes and other situations. Journal of Philosophy 78(7), 369–397 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bovens, L., Rabinowicz, W.: The puzzle of the hats. Synthese (2009) doi: 10.1007/s11229-009-9476-1Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fagin, R., Halpern, J.Y., Moses, Y., Vardi, M.Y.: Reasoning About Knowledge. MIT Press, Cambridge (2003)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gerbrandy, J.D., Groeneveld, W.: Reasoning about information change. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 6, 147–169 (1997)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gomez-Perez, A., Corcho, O., Fernandez-Lopez, M.: Ontological Engineering. Springer, London (2001)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hintikka, J.: Knowledge and Belief: An Introduction to the Logic of The Two Notions. Cornell University Press, Ithaca (1962)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    McCarthy, J., Hayes, P.: Some philosophical problems from the standpoint of artificial intelligence. In: Meltzer, B., Michie, D. (eds.) Machine Intelligence, pp. 463–502. Edinburgh University Press (1969)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    McCarthy, J.: Formalizing Common Sense. Ablex Publishing, Greenwich (1990)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Moore, R.C.: Reasoning about knowledge and action. Technical report, SRI International (1980)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Orlowska, E.: Logic for reasoning about knowledge. Bulletin of the Section of Logic 16(1), 26–36 (1987)zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Plaza, J.A.: Logic of public communications. In: Emrich, M.L., Pfeifer, M.S., Hadzikadic, M., Ras, W. Z. (eds.) Proceeddings of the 4th International Symposium on Methodologies for Intelligent Systems, pp. 201–216 (1989)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Reiter, R.: Knowledge in Action: Logical Foundations for Specifying and Implementing Dynamical Systems. MIT Press, Cambridge (2001)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Scherl, R.B., Levesque, H.J.: The frame problem and knowledge-producing actions. In: Proceedings of the Eleventh National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 689–695. AAAI Press/The MIT Press, Menlo Park (1993)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    van Ditmarsch, H., van der Hoek, W., Kooi, B.: Dynamic Epistemic Logic. Synthese Library Series, vol. 337. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    von Wright, G.H.: An Essay in Modal Logic. North Holland, Amsterdam (1951)zbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paweł Garbacz
    • 1
  • Piotr Kulicki
    • 1
  • Marek Lechniak
    • 1
  • Robert Trypuz
    • 1
  1. 1.John Paul II Catholic University of LublinLublinPoland

Personalised recommendations