Authors
Justine Jacot
Lund University
Abstract
If semantic consequence is analyzed with extensive games, logical reasoning can be accounted for by looking at how players solve entailment games. However, earlier approaches to game semantics cannot achieve this reduction, by want of explicitly dened preferences for players. Moreover, although entailment games can naturally translate the idea of argumentation about a common ground, a cognitive interpretation is undermined by the complexity of strategic reasoning. We thus describe a class of semantic extensive entailment game with algorithmic players, who have preferences for parsimonious spending of computational resources and thus compute partial strategies under qualitative uncertainty about future histories. We prove the existence of local preferences for moves and of strategic fixpoints that allow to map game-trees to tableaux proofs, and exhibit a strategy prole that solves the fixpoint selection problem, and can be mapped to systematic constructions of semantic trees, yielding a completeness result by translation. We then discuss the correspondence between proof heuristics and strategies in our games, the relations of our games to gts, and possible extensions to other entailment relations. We conclude that the main interest of our result lies in the possibility to bridge argumentative and cognitive models of logical reasoning, rather than in new meta-theoretic results. All proofs are given in appendix.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 56,081
External links

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

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Logical Dialogues with Explicit Preference Profiles and Strategy Selection.Emmanuel Genot & Justine Jacot - 2017 - Journal of Logic, Language and Information 26 (3):261-291.
Logic Games Are Complete for Game Logics.Johan van Benthem - 2003 - Studia Logica 75 (2):183-203.
Question–Answer Games.Thomas Ågotnes, Johan van Benthem, Hans van Ditmarsch & Stefan Minica - 2011 - Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics 21 (3-4):265-288.
Comparing the Power of Games on Graphs.Ronald Fagin - 1997 - Mathematical Logic Quarterly 43 (4):431-455.
Mindreading and Endogenous Beliefs in Games.Lauren Larrouy & Guilhem Lecouteux - 2017 - Journal of Economic Methodology 24 (3):318-343.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2020-01-13

Total views
1 ( #1,452,010 of 2,403,822 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #550,507 of 2,403,822 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.

My notes