9 found
Sort by:
Disambiguations:
Jan Broersen [8]Jan M. Broersen [1]
  1. Paolo Turrini, Jan Broersen, Rosja Mastop & John-Jules Meyer (2012). Regulating Competing Coalitions: A Logic for Socially Optimal Group Choices. Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics 22 (1-2):181-202.
    In Multi Agent Systems it is often the case that individual preferences are not compatible and coalitions compete to achieve a given result. The paper presents a language to talk about the conflict between coalitional choices and it expresses deontic notions to evaluate them. We will be specifically concerned with cases where the collective perspective is at odds with the individual perspective.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Jan M. Broersen (2011). Making a Start with the Stit Logic Analysis of Intentional Action. Journal of Philosophical Logic 40 (4):499-530.
    This paper studies intentional action in stit logic. The formal logic study of intentional action appears to be new, since most logical studies of intention concern intention as a static mental state. In the formalization we distinguish three modes of acting: the objective level concerning the choices an agent objectively exercises, the subjective level concerning the choices an agent knows or believes to be exercising, and finally, the intentional level concerning the choices an agent intentionally exercises. Several axioms constraining the (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Jan Broersen, Andreas Herzig & Nicolas Troquard (2009). What Groups Do, Can Do, and Know They Can Do: An Analysis in Normal Modal Logics. Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics 19 (3):261-289.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Jan Broersen, Rosja Mastop, John-Jules Meyer & Paolo Turrini (2009). Determining the Environment: A Modal Logic for Closed Interaction. Synthese 169 (2):351 - 369.
    The aim of the work is to provide a language to reason about Closed Interactions, i.e. all those situations in which the outcomes of an interaction can be determined by the agents themselves and in which the environment cannot interfere with they are able to determine. We will see that two different interpretations can be given of this restriction, both stemming from Pauly Representation Theorem. We will identify such restrictions and axiomatize their logic. We will apply the formal tools to (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Laurens Winkelhagen, Mehdi Dastani & Jan Broersen (2006). Beliefs in Agent Implementation. In. In P. Torroni, U. Endriss, M. Baldoni & A. Omicini (eds.), Declarative Agent Languages and Technologies Iii. Springer. 1--16.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Jan Broersen & Leendert van der Torre (2003). John Horty, Agency and Deontic Logic. Artificial Intelligence and Law 11 (1):45-61.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Jan Broersen & Leendert van der Torre (2003). What an Agent Ought To Do. Artificial Intelligence and Law 11 (1):45-61.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Jan Broersen, Mehdi Dastani & Leendert van der Torre (2002). Realistic Desires. Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics 12 (2):287-308.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Jan Broersen, Mehdi Dastani & Leendert van der Torre (2001). Formalizing No Wishful Thinking. Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics 11 (3-4).
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation