Computation as social agency: What, how and who

Abstract Computation today is interactive agency in social networks. In this discussion paper, we look at this trend through the lens of logic, identifying two main lines. One is ‘epistemization’, making computational tasks refer explicitly to knowledge or beliefs of the agents performing them. The other line is using games as a model for computation, leading to ‘gamification’ of classical tasks, and computing by agents that may have preferences. This provides ingredients for a fundamental theory of computation that shifts from what is computed to how it is computed and by whom, moving from output to social behavior. The true impact of this shift is not in learning how to replace humans, but in creating new societies where humans and machines interact. While we do not offer a Turing-style account of this richer world, we discuss what becomes of three classical themes: the Universal Machine, Church's Thesis and the Turing Test. 1

[1]  Davide Grossi,et al.  Argumentation Theory in the View of Modal Logic , 2011 .

[2]  Andrea Sorbi,et al.  New Computational Paradigms: Changing Conceptions of What is Computable , 2007 .

[3]  Yde Venema,et al.  Algebras and coalgebras , 2007, Handbook of Modal Logic.

[4]  Andreas Witzel,et al.  DEL Planning and Some Tractable Cases , 2011, LORI.

[5]  Z. L. Christoff,et al.  Dynamic logics of networks: Information flow and the spread of opinion , 2016 .

[6]  Ron van der Meyden,et al.  The Dynamic Logic of Permission , 1990, J. Log. Comput..

[7]  Daniel Vanderveken,et al.  Foundations of Illocutionary Logic , 1985 .

[8]  Phan Minh Dung,et al.  On the Acceptability of Arguments and its Fundamental Role in Nonmonotonic Reasoning, Logic Programming and n-Person Games , 1995, Artif. Intell..

[9]  Lawrence H. Landweber,et al.  Definability in the monadic second-order theory of successor , 1969, Journal of Symbolic Logic.

[10]  Michael Wooldridge,et al.  Iterated Boolean games , 2013, Inf. Comput..

[11]  Guido Governatori,et al.  A computationally grounded logic of knowledge, belief and certainty , 2005, AAMAS '05.

[12]  Johan van Benthem,et al.  An Essay on Sabotage and Obstruction , 2005, Mechanizing Mathematical Reasoning.

[13]  Rineke Verbrugge,et al.  Logic and Complexity in Cognitive Science , 2014, Johan van Benthem on Logic and Information Dynamics.

[14]  Johan van Benthem,et al.  Erratum: "Rational Dynamics and Epistemic Logic in Games" , 2007, IGTR.

[15]  Salil P. Vadhan,et al.  Computational Complexity , 2005, Encyclopedia of Cryptography and Security.

[16]  Amir Pnueli,et al.  Smart Play-out of Behavioral Requirements , 2002, FMCAD.

[17]  Alexandru Baltag,et al.  A qualitative theory of dynamic interactive belief revision , 2008 .

[18]  Hans van Ditmarsch,et al.  What will they say?—Public Announcement Games , 2011, Synthese.

[19]  Neil D. Jones,et al.  Blindfold Games are Harder than Games with Perfect Information , 1977 .

[20]  Sonja Smets,et al.  Beliefs supported by Arguments , 2016, CLAR.

[21]  Mark Blokpoel,et al.  Recipient design in human communication: simple heuristics or perspective taking? , 2012, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[22]  K. Lehrer.  Theory Of Knowledge , 1990 .

[23]  M. de Rijke,et al.  Modal Logic , 2001, Cambridge Tracts in Theoretical Computer Science.

[24]  Paolo Turrini,et al.  Short sight in extensive games , 2012, AAMAS.

[25]  Yoav Shoham,et al.  Multiagent Systems - Algorithmic, Game-Theoretic, and Logical Foundations , 2009 .

[26]  Samson Abramsky,et al.  Information, Processes and Games , 2016, ArXiv.

[27]  Adam Brandenburger.  The Language of Game Theory: Putting Epistemics into the Mathematics of Games , 2014 .

[28]  Johan van Benthem,et al.  Logical Dynamics of Information and Interaction: Computation as conversation , 2008 .

[29]  A. Turing.  On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem. , 1937 .

[30]  Yanjing Wang,et al.  A Logic of Knowing How , 2015, LORI.

[31]  N. James,et al.  Know how , 2002, Antiquity.

[32]  Rohit Parikh,et al.  The Logic of Knowledge Based Obligation , 2006, Synthese.

[33]  J. Hintikka,et al.  Game-Theoretical Semantics , 1997 .

[34]  Robert C. Moore.  A Formal Theory of Knowledge and Action , 1984 .

[35]  A. Perea.  Epistemic Game Theory: Reasoning and Choice , 2012 .

[36]  S. Minica,et al.  UvA-DARE ( Digital Academic Repository ) Dynamic logic of questions , 2011 .

[37]  Nina Gierasimczuk,et al.  UvA-DARE ( Digital Academic Repository ) Knowing one ' s limits : logical analysis of inductive inference , 2010 .

[38]  Thomas Bolander,et al.  Epistemic planning for single- and multi-agent systems , 2011, J. Appl. Non Class. Logics.

[39]  David Harel.  Can Programming Be Liberated, Period? , 2008, Computer.

[40]  Edsger W. Dijkstra,et al.  Letters to the editor: go to statement considered harmful , 1968, CACM.

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

[42]  Maricarmen Martinez,et al.  The Stories of Logic and Information , 2006 .

[43]  Ramaswamy Ramanujam,et al.  A Knowledge Based Semantics of Messages , 2003, J. Log. Lang. Inf..

[44]  Johan van Benthem,et al.  Logic in Games , 2014 .

[45]  Andrés Perea,et al.  Epistemic Game Theory , 2012 .

[46]  P. Boas.  Machine models and simulations , 1991 .

[47]  Thomas Wilke,et al.  Automata Logics, and Infinite Games , 2002, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[48]  Johan van Benthem,et al.  A New Game Equivalence and its Modal Logic , 2017, TARK.

[49]  Ronen I. Brafman,et al.  Towards Knowledge-Level Analysis of Motion Planning , 1993, AAAI.

[50]  Johan van Benthem,et al.  Dynamic Logics of Evidence-Based Beliefs , 2011, Stud Logica.

[51]  Johan van Benthem,et al.  The Tree of Knowledge in Action: Towards a Common Perspective , 2006, Advances in Modal Logic.

[52]  Johan van Benthem,et al.  Reasoning about Strategies , 2013, Computation, Logic, Games, and Quantum Foundations.

[53]  Lawrence S. Moss,et al.  The Undecidability of Iterated Modal Relativization , 2005, Stud Logica.

[54]  Jessika Schulze,et al.  Handbook Of Logic In Artificial Intelligence And Logic Programming , 2016 .

[55]  Y. Shoham.  Introduction to Multi-Agent Systems , 2002 .

[56]  J. van Benthem,et al.  Oscillations, Logic, and Dynamical Systems , 2015 .

[57]  Lawrence S. Moss,et al.  The Logic of Public Announcements and Common Knowledge and Private Suspicions , 1998, TARK.

[58]  Joseph Y. Halpern,et al.  The Complexity of Reasoning about Knowledge and Time. I. Lower Bounds , 1989, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[59]  Jerzy Tiuryn,et al.  Dynamic logic , 2001, SIGA.

[60]  Rob van Glabbeek,et al.  Handbook of Process Algebra , 2001 .

[61]  Johan van Benthem,et al.  Exploring logical dynamics , 1996, Studies in logic, language and information.

[62]  W. Hamilton,et al.  The Evolution of Cooperation , 1984 .

[63]  Johan van Benthem,et al.  Merging Frameworks for Interaction , 2009, J. Philos. Log..

[64]  Michael Wooldridge,et al.  Introduction to Multi-Agent Systems , 2016 .

[65]  N. Taatgen,et al.  What Eye Movements Can Tell about Theory of Mind in a Strategic Game , 2012, PloS one.

[66]  Michael P. Wellman.  A Market-Oriented Programming Environment and its Application to Distributed Multicommodity Flow Problems , 1993, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[67]  Fenrong Liu,et al.  Logical dynamics of belief change in the community , 2014, Synthese.

[68]  H. V. Ditmarsch.  OUCS-2002-08 The Russian cards problem : a case study in cryptography with public announcements , 2002 .

[69]  Johan van Benthem,et al.  Sabotage Modal Logic: Some Model and Proof Theoretic Aspects , 2015, LORI.

[70]  Christof Löding,et al.  Model Checking and Satisfiability for Sabotage Modal Logic , 2003, FSTTCS.

[71]  Edsger W. Dijkstra,et al.  Go to Statement Considered Harmful (Reprint) , 2002, Software Pioneers.

[72]  Ulle Endriss,et al.  Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Computational Social Choice (COMSOC-2006) , 2006 .

[73]  Kevin T. Kelly.  The Logic of Reliable Inquiry , 1996 .

[74]  J. Benthem,et al.  Logics of communication and change , 2006 .

[75]  Merlijn Sevenster,et al.  Branches of imperfect information : logic, games, and computation , 2002 .

[76]  W. Hoek,et al.  Dynamic Epistemic Logic , 2007 .

[77]  Philipp Rohde,et al.  On games and logics over dynamically changing structures , 2005 .

[78]  Edsger W. Dijkstra,et al.  Go To Statement Considered Harmful , 2022, Software Pioneers.

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

[80]  John G. Gibbons.  Knowledge in Action , 2001 .

[81]  Michael Wooldridge,et al.  Tractable multiagent planning for epistemic goals , 2002, AAMAS '02.

[82]  Peter van Emde Boas,et al.  Machine Models and Simulation , 1990, Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science, Volume A: Algorithms and Complexity.

[83]  J. Benthem,et al.  Handbook on the Philosophy of Information , 2006 .

[84]  Ariel Rubinstein,et al.  A Course in Game Theory , 1995 .

[85]  Yoram Moses,et al.  Relating Knowledge and Coordinated Action: The Knowledge of Preconditions Principle , 2016, TARK.

[86]  Brian Skyrms,et al.  The Dynamics Of Rational Deliberation , 1990 .

[87]  Johan van Benthem,et al.  Rational Dynamics and Epistemic Logic in Games , 2007, IGTR.

[88]  Keith DeRose.  Knowledge and its Limits , 2002 .

[89]  Josef Hofbauer,et al.  Evolutionary Games and Population Dynamics , 1998 .

[90]  Johan van Benthem,et al.  Logical Dynamics of Information and Interaction , 2014 .

[91]  Yoav Shoham.  Agent-Oriented Programming , 1993, Artif. Intell..

[92]  V. Fiutek.  Playing with knowledge and belief , 2013 .