Deontic Interpreted Systems

We investigate an extension of the formalism of interpreted systems by Halpern and colleagues to model the correct behaviour of agents. The semantical model allows for the representation and reasoning about states of correct and incorrect functioning behaviour of the agents, and of the system as a whole. We axiomatise this semantic class by mapping it into a suitable class of Kripke models. The resulting logic, KD45ni-j, is a stronger version of KD, the system often referred to as Standard Deontic Logic. We extend this formal framework to include the standard epistemic notions defined on interpreted systems, and introduce a new doubly-indexed operator representing the knowledge that an agent would have if it operates under the assumption that a group of agents is functioning correctly. We discuss these issues both theoretically and in terms of applications, and present further directions of work.

[1]  R. Goldblatt.  Logics of Time and Computation , 1987 .

[2]  Max J. Cresswell,et al.  A New Introduction to Modal Logic , 1998 .

[3]  Roel Wieringa,et al.  Deontic logic in computer science: normative system specification , 1994 .

[4]  Alessio Lomuscio,et al.  A formalisation of violation, error recovery, and enforcement in the bit transmission problem , 2004, Journal of Applied Logic.

[5]  Alan Ross Anderson,et al.  A REDUCTION OF DEONTIC LOGIC TO ALETHIC MODAL LOGIC , 1958 .

[6]  Glenn H. MacEwen,et al.  A logic for reasoning about security , 1990, [1990] Proceedings. The Computer Security Foundations Workshop III.

[7]  Michael Wooldridge,et al.  Computationally grounded theories of agency , 2000, Proceedings Fourth International Conference on MultiAgent Systems.

[8]  Alessio Lomuscio,et al.  Towards model checking interpreted systems , 2003, AAMAS '03.

[9]  Mark Ryan,et al.  On the Relation between Interpreted Systems and Kripke Models , 1997, Agents and Multi-Agent Systems Formalisms, Methodologies, and Applications.

[10]  Mark Ryan,et al.  Knowledge in multiagent systems: initial configurations and broadcast , 1999, TOCL.

[11]  Joseph Y. Halpern,et al.  Knowledge and common knowledge in a distributed environment , 1984, JACM.

[12]  Dov M. Gabbay,et al.  Products of Modal Logics, Part 1 , 1998, Log. J. IGPL.

[13]  L. Åqvist.  Good Samaritans, Contrary-to-Duty Imperatives, and Epistemic Obligations , 1967 .

[14]  Brian F. Chellas.  Modal Logic: Normal systems of modal logic , 1980 .

[15]  Ronald Fagin,et al.  What can machines know?: On the properties of knowledge in distributed systems , 1992, JACM.

[16]  John-Jules Ch. Meyer,et al.  Making Some Issues of Implicit Knowledge Explicit , 1992, Int. J. Found. Comput. Sci..

[17]  Ronald Fagin,et al.  Reasoning about knowledge , 1995 .

[18]  Marcus Kracht,et al.  Properties of independently axiomatizable bimodal logics , 1991, Journal of Symbolic Logic.