David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Logic, Language and Information 18 (1):131-158 (2009)
The logical omniscience problem, whereby standard models of epistemic logic treat an agent as believing all consequences of its beliefs and knowing whatever follows from what else it knows, has received plenty of attention in the literature. But many attempted solutions focus on a fairly narrow specification of the problem: avoiding the closure of belief or knowledge, rather than showing how the proposed logic is of philosophical interest or of use in computer science or artificial intelligence. Sentential epistemic logics, as opposed to traditional possible worlds approaches, do not suffer from the problems of logical omniscience but are often thought to lack interesting epistemic properties. In this paper, I focus on the case of rule-based agents, which play a key role in contemporary AI research but have been neglected in the logical literature. I develop a framework for modelling monotonic, nonmonotonic and introspective rule-based reasoners which have limited cognitive resources and prove that the resulting models have a number of interesting properties. An axiomatization of the resulting logic is given, together with completeness, decidability and complexity results.
|Keywords||Epistemic logic Doxastic logic Rule-based agents Resource bounds Artificial intelligence Logical omniscience|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Patrick Blackburn, Maarten de Rijke & Yde Venema (2002). Modal Logic. Cambridge University Press.
Stephen P. Stich (1983). From Folk Psychology to Cognitive Science: The Case Against Belief. MIT Press.
W. V. Quine (1960). Word and Object. The MIT Press.
Jaakko Hintikka (1962). Knowledge and Belief. Ithaca, N.Y.,Cornell University Press.
Citations of this work BETA
Mark Jago (2013). The Content of Deduction. Journal of Philosophical Logic 42 (2):317-334.
Yacin Hamami (2015). The Interrogative Model of Inquiry Meets Dynamic Epistemic Logics. Synthese 192 (6):1609-1642.
Ulf Hlobil (2016). Chains of Inferences and the New Paradigm in the Psychology of Reasoning. Review of Philosophy and Psychology 7 (1):1-16.
Fernando R. Velázquez-Quesada (2014). Dynamic Epistemic Logic for Implicit and Explicit Beliefs. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 23 (2):107-140.
Johan van Benthem & Fernando R. Velázquez-Quesada (2010). The Dynamics of Awareness. Synthese 177 (1):5-27.
Similar books and articles
Johan van Benthem, Jelle Gerbrandy, Tomohiro Hoshi & Eric Pacuit (2009). Merging Frameworks for Interaction. Journal of Philosophical Logic 38 (5):491-526.
Antonio Moreno, Ulises Cortés & Ton Sales (2002). Subjective Situations and Logical Omniscience. Studia Logica 72 (1):7-29.
Guillaume Aucher (2010). An Internal Version of Epistemic Logic. Studia Logica 94 (1):1 - 22.
Natasha Alechina, Mark Jago & Brian Logan (2008). Preference-Based Belief Revision for Rule-Based Agents. Synthese 165 (2):159-177.
Jens Christian Bjerring (2013). Impossible Worlds and Logical Omniscience: An Impossibility Result. Synthese 190 (13):2505-2524.
Jens Christian Bjerring (2010). Non-Ideal Epistemic Spaces. Dissertation, Australian National University
Mark Jago (2007). Hintikka and Cresswell on Logical Omniscience. Logic and Logical Philosophy 15 (3):325-354.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads72 ( #57,379 of 1,793,151 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #205,957 of 1,793,151 )
How can I increase my downloads?