A Simple Modal Logic for Reasoning about Revealed Beliefs
نویسندگان
چکیده
Even though in Artificial Intelligence, a set of classical logical formulae is often called a belief base, reasoning about beliefs requires more than the language of classical logic. This paper proposes a simple logic whose atoms are beliefs and formulae are conjunctions, disjunctions and negations of beliefs. It enables an agent to reason about some beliefs of another agent as revealed by the latter. This logic, called MEL, borrows its axioms from the modal logic KD, but it is an encapsulation of propositional logic rather than an extension thereof. Its semantics is given in terms of subsets of interpretations, and the models of a formula in MEL is a family of such non-empty subsets. It captures the idea that while the consistent epistemic state of an agent about the world is represented by a non-empty subset of possible worlds, the meta-epistemic state of another agent about the former’s epistemic state is a family of such subsets. We prove that any family of non-empty subsets of interpretations can be expressed as a single formula in MEL. This formula is a symbolic counterpart of the Möbius transform in the theory of belief
منابع مشابه
Meta-epistemic logic: A minimal logic for reasoning about revealed beliefs
Reasoning about knowledge described in classical propositional logic is usually handled either in the meta-language as in belief revision, considering the dynamics of belief bases, or at the object level by means of modal logic. In the latter case, modalities express knowledge, belief, or absence thereof, about the truth of formulae. But the semantics is described in terms of accessibility rela...
متن کاملA simple logic for reasoning about incomplete knowledge
The semantics of modal logics for reasoning about belief or knowledge is often described in terms of accessibility relations, which is too expressive to account for mere epistemic states of an agent. This paper proposes a simple logic whose atoms express epistemic attitudes about formulae expressed in another basic propositional language, and that allows for conjunctions, disjunctions and negat...
متن کاملReasoning about Other Agents' Beliefs under Bounded Resources
There exists a considerable body of work on epistemic logics for bounded reasoners where the bound can be time, memory, or the amount of information the reasoners can exchange. In much of this work the epistemic logic is used as a meta-logic to reason about beliefs of the bounded reasoners from an external perspective. In this paper, we present a formal model of a system of bounded reasoners wh...
متن کاملPRACTIONIST: a New Framework for BDI Agents
In this paper, we present PRACTIONIST (PRACTIcal reasONIng sySTem), a new framework built on the Bratman’s theory of practical reasoning to support the development of BDI agents in Java (using JADE) with a Prolog belief base. We aims at reducing the gap between the expressive power of the BDI model and the difficulty of efficiently implementing its features. In PRACTIONIST we adopt a goal-orien...
متن کاملA Logic for Reasoning about Justified Uncertain Beliefs
Justification logic originated from the study of the logic of proofs. However, in a more general setting, it may be regarded as a kind of explicit epistemic logic. In such logic, the reasons why a fact is believed are explicitly represented as justification terms. Traditionally, the modeling of uncertain beliefs is crucially important for epistemic reasoning. While graded modal logics interpret...
متن کامل