The Surprise Examination in Dynamic Epistemic Logic

We examine the paradox of the surprise examination using dynamic epistemic logic. This logic contains means of expressing epistemic facts as well as the effects of learning new facts, and is therefore a natural framework for representing the puzzle. We discuss a number of different interpretations of the puzzle in this context, and show how the failure of principle of success, that states that sentences, when learned, remain to be true and come to be believed, plays a central role in understanding the puzzle.

[1]  Joseph Y. Halpern,et al.  Taken by surprise: The paradox of the surprise test revisited , 1986, J. Philos. Log..

[2]  Peter van Emde Boas,et al.  The Conway Paradox: Its Solution in an Epistemic Framework , 1984 .

[3]  Elliott Sober,et al.  To Give a Surprise Exam, Use Game Theory , 1998, Synthese.

[4]  Jan A. Plaza,et al.  Logics of public communications , 2007, Synthese.

[5]  Jelle Gerbrandy,et al.  Reasoning about Information Change , 1997, J. Log. Lang. Inf..

[6]  Anthony S. Gillies,et al.  A New Solution to Moore's Paradox , 2001 .

[7]  Irene Heim,et al.  The semantics of definite and indefinite noun phrases : a dissertation , 1982 .

[8]  Peter Gärdenfors,et al.  On the logic of theory change: Partial meet contraction and revision functions , 1985, Journal of Symbolic Logic.

[9]  Frank Veltman,et al.  Defaults in update semantics , 1996, J. Philos. Log..

[10]  Johan van Benthem,et al.  What one may come to know , 2004 .

[11]  J. Gerbrandy.  Bisimulations on Planet Kripke , 1999 .

[12]  Robert W. Binkley,et al.  The Surprise Examination in Modal Logic , 1968 .

[13]  R. Shaw,et al.  THE PARADOX OF THE UNEXPECTED EXAMINATION , 1958 .

[14]  Timothy Y. Chow,et al.  The Surprise Examination or Unexpected Hanging Paradox , 1999, math/9903160.

[15]  Hans van Ditmarsch,et al.  The Secret of My Success , 2006, Synthese.

[16]  Fred Landman,et al.  Towards A Theory Of Information , 1986 .

[17]  Lawrence S. Moss,et al.  Logics for Epistemic Programs , 2004, Synthese.

[18]  David Kaplan,et al.  A paradox regained , 1960, Notre Dame J. Formal Log..