Standard Epistemic Logic Research Articles

The Uncoordinated Teachers Puzzle

AbstractWilliamson (2000) argues that the KK principle is inconsistent with knowledge of margin for error in cases of inexact perceptual observations. This paper argues, primarily by analogy to a different scenario, that Williamson's argument is fallacious. Margin for error principles describe the agent's knowledge as a result of an inexact perceptual event, not the agent's knowledge state in general. Therefore, epistemic agents can use their knowledge of margin for error at most once after a perceptual event, but not more. This insight blocks a crucial step in Williamson's original argument. Along the way, the value of standard epistemic logic for analyzing margin for error reasoning is challenged.

Quantifier-free epistemic term-modal logic with assignment operator

In standard epistemic logic, the names and the existence of agents are usually assumed to be common knowledge implicitly. This is unreasonable for various applications in computer science and philosophy. Inspired by term-modal logic and assignment operators in dynamic logic, we introduce a lightweight modal predicate logic where names can be non-rigid, and the existence of agents can be uncertain. The language can handle various de dicto/de re distinctions in a natural way. We characterize the expressive power of our language, obtain complete axiomatisations of the logics over several classes of varying-domain/constant-domain epistemic models, and show their (un)decidability.

A lightweight epistemic logic and its application to planning

We study multiagent epistemic planning with a simple epistemic logic whose language is a restriction of that of standard epistemic logic. Its formulas are boolean combinations of observability atoms: sequences of ‘knowing whether’ operators followed by propositional variables. This compares favourably with other restricted languages where formulas are boolean combinations of epistemic literals: sequences of ‘knowing that’ epistemic operators and negations followed by propositional variables; or in other terms: epistemic formulas without conjunctions or disjunctions. The reason is that our language enables a richer theory of mind: we can express statements such as “I don't know whether p, but I know that you know whether p” which are important in communication and more generally in interaction and which cannot be expressed with epistemic literals. Going beyond previous work, we also introduce a ‘common knowledge whether’ operator. We show that satisfiability is nevertheless NP-complete. We then define simple epistemic planning tasks as generalisations of classical planning tasks: action descriptions have sets of observability atoms as add- and delete-lists, initial states are sets of observability atoms, and goals are boolean combinations of observability atoms. We show that simple epistemic planning tasks can be polynomially translated into classical planning tasks. It follows that checking solvability of simple epistemic planning tasks is PSpace-complete. We present some application examples such as the gossip problem and some experimental results and clarify the relationship with Dynamic Epistemic Logic-based planning.

INQUISITIVE BISIMULATION

AbstractInquisitive modal logic, InqML, is a generalisation of standard Kripke-style modal logic. In its epistemic incarnation, it extends standard epistemic logic to capture not just the information that agents have, but also the questions that they are interested in. Technically, InqML fits within the family of logics based on team semantics. From a model-theoretic perspective, it takes us a step in the direction of monadic second-order logic, as inquisitive modal operators involve quantification over sets of worlds. We introduce and investigate the natural notion of bisimulation equivalence in the setting of InqML. We compare the expressiveness of InqML and first-order logic in the context of relational structures with two sorts, one for worlds and one for information states, and characterise inquisitive modal logic as the bisimulation invariant fragment of first-order logic over various natural classes of two-sorted structures.

The KK principle and rotational symmetry

The KK principle and rotational symmetry

Epistemic logic without closure

All standard epistemic logics legitimate something akin to the principle of closure, according to which knowledge is closed under competent deductive inference. And yet the principle of closure, particularly in its multiple premise guise, has a somewhat ambivalent status within epistemology. One might think that serious concerns about closure point us away from epistemic logic altogether—away from the very idea that the knowledge relation could be fruitfully treated as a kind of modal operator. This, however, need not be so. The abandonment of closure may yet leave in place plenty of formal structure amenable to systematic logical treatment. In this paper we describe a family of weak epistemic logics in which closure fails, and describe two alternative semantic frameworks in which these logics can be modelled. One of these—which we term plurality semantics—is relatively unfamiliar. We explore under what conditions plurality frames validate certain much-discussed principles of epistemic logic. It turns out that plurality frames can be interpreted in a very natural way in light of one motivation for rejecting closure, adding to the significance of our technical work. The second framework that we employ—neighbourhood semantics—is much better known. But we show that it too can be interpreted in a way that comports with a certain motivation for rejecting closure.

How to Agree without Understanding Each Other: Public Announcement Logic with Boolean Definitions

In standard epistemic logic, knowing that p is the same as knowing that p is true, but it does not say anything about understanding p or knowing its meaning. In this paper, we present a conservative extension of Public Announcement Logic (PAL) in which agents have knowledge or belief about both the truth values and the meanings of propositions. We give a complete axiomatization of PAL with Boolean Definitions and discuss various examples. An agent may understand a proposition without knowing its truth value or the other way round. Moreover, multiple agents can agree on something without agreeing on its meaning and vice versa.

Once More about Moore’s Paradox in Epistemic Logic and Belief Change Theory

In this article, it was first presented Moore’s paradox per se and after the author focused on the logical perspective—at first he analyzed these considerations in the field of so-called standard epistemic logic and after on the formal theory of belief change.

Bisimulation in Inquisitive Modal Logic

Inquisitive modal logic, InqML, is a generalisation of standard Kripke-style modal logic. In its epistemic incarnation, it extends standard epistemic logic to capture not just the information that agents have, but also the questions that they are interested in. Technically, InqML fits within the family of logics based on team semantics. From a model-theoretic perspective, it takes us a step in the direction of monadic second-order logic, as inquisitive modal operators involve quantification over sets of worlds. We introduce and investigate the natural notion of bisimulation equivalence in the setting of InqML. We compare the expressiveness of InqML and first-order logic, and characterise inquisitive modal logic as the bisimulation invariant fragments of first-order logic over various classes of two-sorted relational structures. These results crucially require non-classical methods in studying bisimulations and first-order expressiveness over non-elementary classes.

Inquisitive dynamic epistemic logic

Information exchange can be seen as a dynamic process of raising and resolving issues. The goal of this paper is to provide a logical framework to model and reason about this process. We develop an inquisitive dynamic epistemic logic (IDEL), which enriches the standard framework of dynamic epistemic logic (DEL), incorporating insights from recent work on inquisitive semantics. At a static level, IDEL does not only allow us to model the information available to a set of agents, like standard epistemic logic, but also the issues that the agents entertain. At a dynamic level, IDEL does not only allow us to model the effects of communicative actions that provide new information, like standard DEL, but also the effects of actions that raise new issues. Thus, IDEL provides the fundamental tools needed to analyze information exchange as a dynamic process of raising and resolving issues.

Public announcement logic with distributed knowledge: expressivity, completeness and complexity

While dynamic epistemic logics with common knowledge have been extensively studied, dynamic epistemic logics with distributed knowledge have so far received far less attention. In this paper we study extensions of public announcement logic (\(\mathcal{PAL }\)) with distributed knowledge, in particular their expressivity, axiomatisations and complexity. \(\mathcal{PAL }\) extended only with distributed knowledge is not more expressive than standard epistemic logic with distributed knowledge. Our focus is therefore on \(\mathcal{PACD }\), the result of adding both common and distributed knowledge to \(\mathcal{PAL }\), which is more expressive than each of its component logics. We introduce an axiomatisation of \(\mathcal{PACD }\), which is not surprising: it is the combination of well-known axioms. The completeness proof, however, is not trivial, and requires novel combinations and extensions of techniques for dealing with \(S5\) knowledge, distributed knowledge, common knowledge and public announcements at the same time. We furthermore show that \(\mathcal{PACD }\) is decidable, more precisely that it is \(\textsc {exptime}\)-complete. This result also carries over to \(\mathcal{S 5\mathcal CD }\) with common and distributed knowledge operators for all coalitions (and not only the grand coalition). Finally, we propose a notion of a trans-bisimulation to generalise certain results and give deeper insight into the proofs.

Quantum teleportation and quantum epistemic semantics

Abstract Quantum information gives rise to some puzzling epistemic problems that can be interestingly investigated from a logical point of view. A characteristic example is represented by teleportation phenomena, where knowledge and actions of observers (epistemic agents) play a relevant role. By abstracting from teleportation, we propose a simplified semantics for a language that consists of two parts: 1)the quantum computational sub-language, whose sentences α represent pieces of quantum information (which are supposed to be stored by some quantum systems)2)the classical epistemic sub-language, whose atomic sentences have the following forms: agent a has a probabilistic information about the sentence α; agent a knows the sentence α. Interestingly enough, some conceptual difficulties of standard epistemic logics can be avoided in this framework.

Reasoning about knowledge of unawareness

Awareness has been shown to be a useful addition to standard epistemic logic. However, standard propositional logics for knowledge and awareness cannot express the fact that an agent knows that there are facts of which he is unaware without there being an explicit fact that the agent knows he is unaware of. We extend Fagin and Halpern's logic of general awareness to a logic that allows quantification over variables, so that there is a formula in the language that says “an agent explicitly knows that there exists a fact of which he is unaware.” Moreover, that formula can be true without the agent explicitly knowing that he is unaware of any particular formula. We provide a sound and complete axiomatization of the logic. Finally, we show that the validity problem for the logic is recursively enumerable, but not decidable.

Interactive unawareness revisited

We analyze a model of interactive unawareness introduced by Heifetz, Meier and Schipper. We consider two axiomatizations for their model, which capture different notions of validity. These axiomatizations allow us to compare the Heifetz et al. approach to both the standard (S5) epistemic logic and two other approaches to unawareness: that of Fagin and Halpern and that of Modica and Rustichini. We show that the differences between the Heifetz et al. approach and the others are mainly due to the notion of validity used and the fact that the Heifetz et al. approach is based on a 3-valued propositional logic.

Agent-oriented programming

A new computational framework is presented, called agent-oriented programming (AOP), which can be viewed as a specialization of object-oriented programming. The state of an agent consists of components such as beliefs, decisions, capabilities, and obligations; for this reason the state of an agent is called its mental state. The mental state of agents is described formally in an extension of standard epistemic logics: beside temporalizing the knowledge and belief operators, AOP introduces operators for obligation, decision, and capability. Agents are controlled by agent programs, which include primitives for communicating with other agents. In the spirit of speech act theory, each communication primitive is of a certain type: informing, requesting, offering, and so on. This article presents the concept of AOP, discusses the concept of mental state and its formal underpinning, defines a class of agent interpreters, and then describes in detail a specific interpreter that has been implemented.

An intensional epistemic logic

One of the fundamental properties inclassical equational reasoning isLeibniz's principle of substitution. Unfortunately, this propertydoes not hold instandard epistemic logic. Furthermore,Herbrand's lifting theorem which isessential to thecompleteness ofresolution andParamodulation in theclassical first order logic (FOL), turns out to be invalid in standard epistemic logic. In particular, unlike classical logic, there is no skolemization normal form for standard epistemic logic. To solve these problems, we introduce anintensional epistemic logic, based on avariation of Kripke's possible-worlds semantics that need not have a constant domain. We show how a weaker notion of substitution through indexed terms can retain the Herbrand theorem. We prove how the logic can yield a satisfibility preserving skolemization form. In particular, we present an intensional principle for unifing indexed terms. Finally, we describe asound andcomplete inference system for a Horn subset of the logic withequality, based onepistemic SLD-resolution.