Related papers: A Logic of Expertise
Consider the following belief change/merging scenario. A group of information sources gives a sequence of reports about the state of the world at various instances (e.g. different points in time). The true states at these instances are…
In this paper we introduce Epistemic Strategy Logic (ESL), an extension of Strategy Logic with modal operators for individual knowledge. This enhanced framework allows us to represent explicitly and to reason about the knowledge agents have…
Standard models of multi-agent modal logic do not capture the fact that information is often \emph{ambiguous}, and may be interpreted in different ways by different agents. We propose a framework that can model this, and consider different…
The paper investigates an evidence-based semantics for epistemic logics. It is shown that the properties of knowledge obtained from a potentially infinite body of evidence are described by modal logic S5. At the same time, the properties of…
A central question of crowd-sourcing is how to elicit expertise from agents. This is even more difficult when answers cannot be directly verified. A key challenge is that sophisticated agents may strategically withhold effort or information…
Attempts to replicate probabilistic reasoning in expert systems have typically overlooked a critical ingredient of that process. Probabilistic analysis typically requires extensive judgments regarding interdependencies among hypotheses and…
In this paper, we propose a single-agent modal logic framework for reasoning about goal-direct "knowing how" based on ideas from linguistics, philosophy, modal logic and automated planning. We first define a modal language to express "I…
Substantial efforts have been made in developing various Decision Modeling formalisms, both from industry and academia. A challenging problem is that of expressing decision knowledge in the context of incomplete knowledge. In such contexts,…
We present a logical framework that enables us to define a formal theory of computational trust in which this notion is analysed in terms of epistemic attitudes towards the possible objects of trust and in relation to existing evidence in…
In many situations humans have to reason with inconsistent knowledge. These inconsistencies may occur due to not fully reliable sources of information. In order to reason with inconsistent knowledge, it is not possible to view a set of…
Recent years witnessed a growing interest in non-standard epistemic logics of knowing whether, knowing how, knowing what, knowing why and so on. The new epistemic modalities introduced in those logics all share, in their semantics, the…
Epistemic modal logic normally views an epistemic situation as a Kripke model. We consider a more basic approach: to view an epistemic situation as a set W of possible states/worlds -- maximal consistent sets of propositions -- with…
By 'informational entropy', we understand an inherent boundary to knowability, due e.g. to perceptual, theoretical, evidential or linguistic limits. In this paper, we discuss a logical framework in which this boundary is incorporated into…
We use a novel type of epistemic logic, employing comparative knowledge assertions, to analyze the relative epistemic powers of individuals or groups of agents. Such comparative assertions can express that a group has the potential to…
Defeasible reasoning is a kind of reasoning where some generalisations may not be valid in all circumstances, that is general conclusions may fail in some cases. Various formalisms have been developed to model this kind of reasoning, which…
Standard epistemic logics introduce a modal operator K to represent knowledge, but in doing so they presuppose the logical apparatus they aim to explain. By contrast, this paper explores how logic may be derived from the structure of…
The notion of argumentation and the one of belief stand in a problematic relation to one another. On the one hand, argumentation is crucial for belief formation: as the outcome of a process of arguing, an agent might come to (justifiably)…
In many expert and everyday reasoning contexts it is very useful to reason on the basis of defeasible assumptions. For instance, if the information at hand is incomplete we often use plausible assumptions, or if the information is…
This paper proposes a formal framework for modeling the interaction of causal and (qualitative) epistemic reasoning. To this purpose, we extend the notion of a causal model with a representation of the epistemic state of an agent. On the…
Humans currently use arguments for explaining choices which are already made, or for evaluating potential choices. Each potential choice has usually pros and cons of various strengths. In spite of the usefulness of arguments in a decision…