Group Intention = Social Choice + Commitment

An agent intends g if it has chosen to pursue goal g an is committed to pursuing g . How do groups decide on a common goal? Social epistemology offers two views on collective attitudes: according to the summative approach, a group has attitude P if all or most of the group members have the attitude P; according to the non-summative approach, for a group to have attitude P it is required that the members together agree that they have attitude P. The summative approach is used extensively in multi-agent systems. We propose a formalization of non-summative group intentions, using social choice to determine the group goals. We use judgment aggregation as a decision-making mechanism and a multi-modal multi-agent logic to represent the collective attitudes, as well as the commitment and revision strategies for the groups intentions.

[1]  A. Meijers,et al.  Collective agents and cognitive attitudes , 2002 .

[2]  Raul Hakli,et al.  Group beliefs and the distinction between belief and acceptance , 2006, Cognitive Systems Research.

[3]  Michael Clarke,et al.  Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning and Uncertainty , 1991, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[4]  Gabriella Pigozzi,et al.  Reliable Methods of Judgment Aggregation , 2007 .

[5]  Klaus Schild.  On the Relationship Between BDI Logics and Standard Logics of Concurrency , 1998, ATAL.

[6]  B. Chapman,et al.  Rational Aggregation , 2002 .

[7]  Christian List,et al.  STRATEGY-PROOF JUDGMENT AGGREGATION* , 2005, Economics and Philosophy.

[8]  Nicholas R. Jennings,et al.  The Cooperative Problem-solving Process , 1999, J. Log. Comput..

[9]  Frank Wolter,et al.  Fusions of Modal Logics Revisited , 1996, Advances in Modal Logic.

[10]  Anthony Quinton,et al.  I—The Presidential Address: Social Objects , 1976 .

[11]  Christian List,et al.  Arrow’s theorem in judgment aggregation , 2005, Soc. Choice Welf..

[12]  Lawrence G. Sager,et al.  The One and the Many: Adjudication in Collegial Courts , 1993 .

[13]  Greg Restall.  Logic: An Introduction , 2005 .

[14]  Vincent Conitzer,et al.  Vote elicitation: complexity and strategy-proofness , 2002, AAAI/IAAI.

[15]  Sébastien Konieczny,et al.  Merging with Integrity Constraints , 1999, ESCQARU.

[16]  R. J. Nelson.  The Logic of Acceptance , 1989 .

[17]  Olivier Roy,et al.  A dynamic-epistemic hybrid logic for intentions and information changes in strategic games , 2009, Synthese.

[18]  Guido Boella,et al.  The ontological properties of social roles in multi-agent systems: definitional dependence, powers and roles playing roles , 2007, Artificial Intelligence and Law.

[19]  Gabriella Pigozzi,et al.  Reliable Methods of Judgement Aggregation , 2010, J. Log. Comput..

[20]  Ulrich Endriss,et al.  Compactly representing utility functions using weighted goals and the max aggregator , 2010, Artif. Intell..

[21]  Margaret Gilbert.  Modelling collective belief , 1987, Synthese.

[22]  Margaret Gilbert,et al.  Belief and Acceptance as Features of Groups , 2002 .

[23]  Yoav Shoham,et al.  Joint revision of belief and intention , 2010, KR 2010.

[24]  Patrice Perny,et al.  Algorithmic Decision Theory: First International Conference, ADT 2009, Venice, Italy, October 20-23, 2009. Proceedings , 2009, ADT.

[25]  Michael P. Georgeff,et al.  Social plans: a preliminary report (abstract) , 1992, SIGO.

[26]  Margaret Gilbert,et al.  Shared intention and personal intentions , 2009 .

[27]  Emiliano Lorini,et al.  A Logical Account of Institutions: From Acceptances to Norms via Legislators , 2008, KR.

[28]  Wojciech Jamroga,et al.  Towards a theory of intention revision , 2007, Synthese.

[29]  Luke Hunsberger,et al.  The dynamics of intention in collaborative activity , 2006, Cognitive Systems Research.

[30]  Gabriella Pigozzi,et al.  A Complete Conclusion-Based Procedure for Judgment Aggregation , 2009, ADT.

[31]  Hector J. Levesque,et al.  Intention is Choice with Commitment , 1990, Artif. Intell..

[32]  C. List,et al.  Judgment aggregation: A survey , 2009 .

[33]  Margaret Gilbert.  Acting Together, Joint Commitment, and Obligation , 2002 .

[34]  Hector J. Levesque,et al.  On Acting Together , 1990, AAAI.

[35]  Nicholas R. Jennings,et al.  Controlling Cooperative Problem Solving in Industrial Multi-Agent Systems Using Joint Intentions , 1995, Artif. Intell..

[36]  Barbara Dunin-Keplicz,et al.  Collective Intentions , 2002, Fundam. Informaticae.

[37]  Vincent Conitzer,et al.  Communication complexity of common voting rules , 2005, EC '05.

[38]  Cristiano Castelfranchi,et al.  The role of beliefs in goal dynamics: prolegomena to a constructive theory of intentions , 2007, Synthese.

[39]  Barbara Dunin-Keplicz,et al.  Teamwork in Multi-Agent Systems - A Formal Approach , 2010, Wiley series in agent technology.

[40]  Olivier Roy,et al.  Intentions and interactive transformations of decision problems , 2009, Synthese.

[41]  Amir Pnueli,et al.  The temporal logic of programs , 1977, 18th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (sfcs 1977).

[42]  Michael Georgeff,et al.  Intentions and Rational Commitment , 1993 .

[43]  Fred Kröger,et al.  Temporal Logic of Programs , 1987, EATCS Monographs on Theoretical Computer Science.