@inproceedings{torre04specifying,
abstract = {In this paper we investigate the specification and verification of information systems with an organizational structure. Such systems are modelled as a normative multiagent system. To this end we use $KBDIO_{CTL}$, an extension of $BDI_{CTL}$ in which obligations and permissions are represented by directed modal operators. We illustrate how the logic can be used by introducing and discussing various properties of normative systems and individual agents which can be represented in the logic. In particular we discuss the enforcement of norms.},
author = {Leendert van der Torre and Joris Hulstijn and Mehdi Dastani and Jan Broersen},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Deontic Logic in Computer Science (DEON 2004), Madeira, Portugal, May 26-28, 2004},
editor = {A. Lomuscio and D. Nute},
keywords = {deon04},
number = {3065/2004},
pages = {243--257},
publisher = {Springer},
series = {LNCS},
title = {Specifying Multiagent Organizations},
year = {2004}
}
@inproceedings{raimondi04automatic,
abstract = {We present an algorithm and its implementation for the verification of correct behaviour and epistemic states in multiagent systems. The verification is performed via model checking techniques based on OBDD's. We test our implementation by means of a communication example: the bit transmission problem with faults.},
author = {Franco Raimondi and Alessio Lomuscio},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Deontic Logic in Computer Science (DEON 2004), Madeira, Portugal, May 26-28, 2004},
editor = {A. Lomuscio and D. Nute},
keywords = {deon04},
number = {3065/2004},
pages = {228--242},
publisher = {Springer},
series = {LNCS},
title = {Automatic Verification of Deontic Properties of Multi-agent Systems},
year = {2004}
}
@inproceedings{pacheco04delegation,
abstract = {In an organizational context the norms that apply to an agent depend on the roles he holds in the organization. The deontic characterization of structural roles is defined when the organization is created. But an organization is not a static entity. Among the dynamic phenomena that occur in an organization there are interactions between agents consisting in a transference of obligations or permissions from an agent to another. These kind of interactions are called delegation. In this paper we analyze different ways in which delegation occurs in an organizational context. We argue that the concept of agent in a role is relevant to understand delegation. A deontic and action modal logic is used to specify this concept.},
author = {Olga Pacheco and Filipe Santos},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Deontic Logic in Computer Science (DEON 2004), Madeira, Portugal, May 26-28, 2004},
editor = {A. Lomuscio and D. Nute},
keywords = {deon04},
number = {3065/2004},
pages = {209--227},
publisher = {Springer},
series = {LNCS},
title = {Delegation in a Role-Based Organization},
year = {2004}
}
@inproceedings{kouznetsov04quasi,
abstract = {We use non-Kripkean quasi-matrix semantics for the formalization of the systems $S_{3d}$, $S_{3dp}$ and $S_{3dq}$ of deontic logic. The system $S_{3d}$ is weaker than the standard logic . The semantics for $S_{3dp}$ represents combination of quasi-matrix semantics and the semantics of truth value gluts, which allows $S_{3dp}$ to avoid deontic explosion $O A \wedge O \neg B \supset O B$. The system $S_{3dq}$ rejects both deontic explosion and the formula $O A \wedge O \neg A \supset O A \wedge O \neg A$, thus it allows to consider deontic dilemmas without classical contradictions.
The systems $S_{5d}$, $S_{5dp}$ and $S_{5dq}$ in which the two types of deontic operators are used, namely, strong and weak obligation (permission), can be built as an extension of the correspondent systems $S_{3d}$, $S_{3dp}$ and $S_{3dq}$ .},
author = {Andrei Kouznetsov},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Deontic Logic in Computer Science (DEON 2004), Madeira, Portugal, May 26-28, 2004},
editor = {A. Lomuscio and D. Nute},
keywords = {deon04},
number = {3065/2004},
pages = {191--208},
publisher = {Springer},
series = {LNCS},
title = {Quasi-matrix Deontic Logic},
year = {2004}
}
@inproceedings{goble04proposal,
abstract = {In this paper I propose a simple modification of standard deontic logic that will enable the system to accommodate deontic dilemmas without inconsistency and without deontic explosion, while at the same time preserving the range of genuinely valid inferences. The proposal applies both to monadic deontic logic and to a dyadic logic of conditional obligation. In the Appendix these systems are proved to be sound and complete with respect to an appropriate semantics and also to be decidable.},
author = {Lou Goble},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Deontic Logic in Computer Science (DEON 2004), Madeira, Portugal, May 26-28, 2004},
editor = {A. Lomuscio and D. Nute},
keywords = {deon04},
number = {3065/2004},
pages = {74--113},
publisher = {Springer},
series = {LNCS},
title = {A Proposal for Dealing with Deontic Dilemmas},
year = {2004}
}
@inproceedings{jamroga04obligations,
abstract = {In this paper, we combine deontic logic with Alternating-time Temporal Logic (ATL) into a framework that makes it possible to model and reason about obligations and abilities of agents. The way both frameworks are combined is technically straightforward: we add deontic accessibility relations to ATL models (concurrent game structures), and deontic operators to the language of ATL (an additional operator is proposed for unconditionally permitted properties, similar to the all I know operator from epistemic logic). Our presentation is rather informal: we focus on examples of how obligations (interpreted as requirements) can be confronted with ways of satisfying them by actors of the game. Though some formal results are presented, the paper should not be regarded as a definite statement on how logics of obligation and strategic ability must be combined; instead, it is intended for stimulating discussion about such kinds of reasoning, and the models that can underpin it.},
author = {Wojciech Jamroga and Wiebe van der Hoek and Michael Wooldridge},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Deontic Logic in Computer Science (DEON 2004), Madeira, Portugal, May 26-28, 2004},
editor = {A. Lomuscio and D. Nute},
keywords = {deon04},
number = {3065/2004},
pages = {165--181},
publisher = {Springer},
series = {LNCS},
title = {On Obligations and Abilities},
year = {2004}
}
@inproceedings{hansen04conflicting,
abstract = {Often a set of imperatives or norms seems satisfiable from the outset, but conflicts arise when ways to fulfill all are ruled out by unfortunate circumstances. Semantic methods to handle normative conflicts were devised by B. van Fraassen and J. F. Horty, but these are not sensitive to circumstances. The present paper extends these resolution mechanisms to circumstantial inputs, defines according dyadic deontic operators, and provides a sound and (weakly) complete axiomatic system for such a deontic semantics.},
author = {J\"org Hansen},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Deontic Logic in Computer Science (DEON 2004), Madeira, Portugal, May 26-28, 2004},
editor = {A. Lomuscio and D. Nute},
keywords = {deon04},
number = {3065/2004},
pages = {146--164},
publisher = {Springer},
series = {LNCS},
title = {Conflicting Imperatives and Dyadic Deontic Logic},
year = {2004}
}
@inproceedings{jones04normative,
abstract = {This paper is a preliminary investigation into the application of the formal-logical theory of normative positions to the characterisation of normative-informational positions, pertaining to rules that are meant to regulate the supply of information.},
author = {Andrew J. I. Jones},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Deontic Logic in Computer Science (DEON 2004), Madeira, Portugal, May 26-28, 2004},
editor = {A. Lomuscio and D. Nute},
keywords = {deon04},
number = {3065/2004},
pages = {182--191},
publisher = {Springer},
series = {LNCS},
title = {On Normative-Informational Positions},
year = {2004}
}
@inproceedings{governatori04defeasible,
abstract = {We propose a computationally oriented non-monotonic multi-modal logic arising from the combination of agency, intention and obligation. We argue about the defeasible nature of these notions and then we show how to represent and reason with them in the setting of defeasible logic.},
author = {Guido Governatori and Antonino Rotolo},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Deontic Logic in Computer Science (DEON 2004), Madeira, Portugal, May 26-28, 2004},
editor = {A. Lomuscio and D. Nute},
keywords = {deon04},
number = {3065/2004},
pages = {114--128},
publisher = {Springer},
series = {LNCS},
title = {Defeasible Logic: Agency, Intention and Obligation},
year = {2004}
}
@inproceedings{wyner04maintaining,
abstract = {We consider the logical representation of obligations on stative expressions such as The yard must be clean in the context of legal contract formation, execution, and monitoring (cf. Wyner ([28])). In a contract, the expression may understood as an obligation to maintain a property. We use a Deontic Action Logic to represent obligations over the course of time (Khosla and Maibaum ([13]) and Meyer ([17])). Our analysis is in contrast to dAltan, Meyer, and Wieringa ([6]), who reduce deontic operators to an Alethic Logic plus a violation proposition (Anderson and Moore ([1]), which has no temporal component. In addition, they use a Deontic Action Logic to represent obligations on actions. We claim the Alethic component of the logic is redundant for the purposes of representing obligations on stative expressions in a contract. In the course of the analysis, we introduce polynormativity, which contrasts with the binormativity of standard DAL or alethic logic plus a violation proposition. We discuss the advantages of polynormativity in reasoning from violations and fulfillments.},
author = {Adam Zachary Wyner},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Deontic Logic in Computer Science (DEON 2004), Madeira, Portugal, May 26-28, 2004},
editor = {A. Lomuscio and D. Nute},
keywords = {deon04},
number = {3065/2004},
pages = {258--274},
publisher = {Springer},
series = {LNCS},
title = {Maintaining Obligations on Stative Expressions in a Deontic Action Logic},
year = {2004}
}
@inproceedings{demolombe04obligation,
abstract = {Obligation change raises the frame problem which is to characterise what obligations remain unchanged after an action has been performed. Many general solutions have been proposed but even if they are attractive from a thoretical point of view they have practical drawbacks. In this paper simple solutions are proposed thanks to the restriction to obligations that take the form of modal literals. These solutions are presented in the framework of dependence logic and of situation calculus, and it is shown that they are based on the same intuitive idea. This idea is to express that we have a complete representation of actions and circumstances that can change an obligation.},
author = {Robert Demolombe and Andreas Herzig},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Deontic Logic in Computer Science (DEON 2004), Madeira, Portugal, May 26-28, 2004},
editor = {A. Lomuscio and D. Nute},
keywords = {deon04},
number = {3065/2004},
pages = {57--73},
publisher = {Springer},
series = {LNCS},
title = {Obligation Change in Dependence Logic and Situation Calculus},
year = {2004}
}
@inproceedings{boella04delta,
abstract = {In this paper we consider the relation between desires and obligations in normative multiagent systems. We introduce a model of their relation based on what we call the social delegation cycle, which explains the creation of norms from agent desires in three steps. First individual agent desires generate group goals, then a group goal is individualized in a social norm, and finally the norm is accepted by the agents when it leads to the fulfilment of the desires the cycle started with. We formalize the social delegation cycle by formalizing goal generation as a merging process of the individual agent desires, we formalize norm creation as a planning process for both the obligation and the associated sanctions or rewards, and we formalize the acceptance relation as both a belief of agents that the fulfilment of the norm leads to achievement of their desires, and the belief that other agents will act according to the norm.},
author = {Guido Boella and Leendert W. N. van der Torre},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Deontic Logic in Computer Science (DEON 2004), Madeira, Portugal, May 26-28, 2004},
editor = {A. Lomuscio and D. Nute},
keywords = {deon04},
number = {3065/2004},
pages = {29--42},
publisher = {Springer},
series = {LNCS},
title = {Delta: The Social Delegation Cycle},
year = {2004}
}
@inproceedings{broersen04designing,
abstract = {This paper studies the logic of a dyadic modal operator for being obliged to meet a condition $\rho$ before a condition $\delta$ becomes true. Starting from basic intuitions we arrive at a simple semantics for deadline obligations in terms of branching time models. We show that this notion of deadline obligation can be characterized in the branching time logic CTL. The defined operator obeys intuitive logic properties, like monotony w.r.t. $\rho$ and anti-monotony w.r.t. $\delta$, and avoids some counter-intuitive properties like agglomeration w.r.t $\rho$ and weak agglomeration w.r.t. $\delta$. However, obligations of this type are implied by the actual achievement of $\rho$ before the deadline. We argue that this problem is caused by the fact that we model the obligation only from the point of view of its violation conditions. We show that the property might be eliminated by considering success conditions also.},
author = {Jan Broersen and Frank Dignum and Virginia Dignum and\text{J.-J. Ch} Meyer},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Deontic Logic in Computer Science (DEON 2004), Madeira, Portugal, May 26-28, 2004},
editor = {A. Lomuscio and D. Nute},
keywords = {deon04},
number = {3065/2004},
pages = {43--56},
publisher = {Springer},
series = {LNCS},
title = {Designing a Deontic Logic of Deadlines},
year = {2004}
}
@inproceedings{aqvist04combinations,
abstract = {We consider three infinite hierarchies of what I call two-dimensional temporal logics with explicit realization operators, viz. (i) one without historical or deontic modalities, (ii) one with historical but without deontic modalities, and (iii) one with historical and with dyadic deontic modalities for conditional obligation and permission. Sound and complete axiomatizations are obtained for all three hierarchies relative to a simplified version of the finite co-ordinate system semantics given for so-called T x W logic of historical necessity in \AAqvist (1999).},
author = {Lennart {\AA}qvist},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Deontic Logic in Computer Science (DEON 2004), Madeira, Portugal, May 26-28, 2004},
editor = {A. Lomuscio and D. Nute},
keywords = {deon04},
number = {3065/2004},
pages = {3--28},
publisher = {Springer},
series = {LNCS},
title = {Combinations of Tense and Deontic Modality},
year = {2004}
}
@inproceedings{wooldridge04social,
abstract = {Since it was first proposed by Moses, Shoham, and Tennenholtz, the social laws paradigm has proved to be one of the most compelling approaches to the offline coordination of multiagent systems. In this paper, we make three key contributions to the theory and practice of social laws in multiagent systems. First, we show that the Alternating-time Temporal Logic of Alur, Henzinger, and Kupferman provides an elegant and powerful framework within which to express and understand social laws for multiagent systems. Second, we show that the effectiveness, feasibility, and synthesis problems for social laws may naturally be framed as atl model checking problems, and that as a consequence, existing atl model checkers may be applied to these problems. We illustrate the concepts and techniques developed by means of a running example.
(joint with with Wiebe van der Hoek and Mark Roberts)},
author = {Wooldridge, M.},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Deontic Logic in Computer Science (DEON 2004), Madeira, Portugal, May 26-28, 2004},
editor = {A. Lomuscio and D. Nute},
keywords = {deon04},
note = {Abstract of invited talk},
number = {3065/2004},
pages = {2},
publisher = {Springer},
series = {LNCS},
title = {Social Laws in Alternating Time},
year = {2004}
}
@inproceedings{brown04obligation,
abstract = {Many obligations can be seen as arising from contractual arrangements (or from situations resembling contractual arrangements) among agents. My obligation to repay you the $100 I borrowed is associated with a simple (quite possibly tacit and informal) contractual arrangement between us. My obligations as an employee of my university are associated with contractual arrangements with my university, which may be considered a collective agent. My university in turn has certain obligations to me. But some obligations change over time as a result of changing circumstances, and in at least some cases the changes that occur can be thought of as involving a renegotiation of a contract among the parties involved. When I pay back half the money I owe you, I have not fulfilled my original obligation; but neither does that original obligation to pay you $100 still stand. Instead, we may consider, we have renegotiated my contract with you so that my remaining obligation is to pay you $50 (or, depending on details of the negotiation, perhaps $50 plus interest or a late fee). Analogous, though usually more explicit, renegotiations of contracts are commonplace in the corporate world as well. As we examine this way of looking at normative situations, we find a number of complications which must be considered, many of which we are accustomed to set aside in simpler treatments of deontic logic. We must consider the relationships among distinct agents, not just consider the normative positions of one agent at a time. We need to make room for corporate agents, i.e. agents which are organizations or groups of other agents. We need to consider that a single agent may be involved in multiple contractual arrangements, and thus may have a number of different normative roles simultaneously. As a result, we must make room for conflicting obligations. And we must allow for various kinds of modifications of contractual arrangements over time, including negotiation and renegotiation. Moreover, ultimately we must consider ways in which complex organizations are related to their changing roster of participant agents, whose roles within the organization alter over time.
In this paper, I will discuss a number of the issues which arise in any attempt to formalize a contractual model of our changing normative situations.},
author = {Brown, M.},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Deontic Logic in Computer Science (DEON 2004), Madeira, Portugal, May 26-28, 2004},
editor = {A. Lomuscio and D. Nute},
keywords = {deon04},
note = {Abstract of invited talk},
number = {3065/2004},
pages = {1},
publisher = {Springer},
series = {LNCS},
title = {Obligation, Contracts, and Negotiation},
year = {2004}
}
@inproceedings{grossi04collective,
abstract = {This work addresses the issue of obligations directed to groups of agents. Our main concern consists in providing a formal analysis of the structure connecting collective obligations to individual ones: which individual agent in a group should be held responsible if an obligation directed to the whole group is not fulfilled? To this aim, concepts from planning literature (like plan and task allocation) are first used in order to conceptualize collective agency, and then formalized by means of a dynamic deontic logic framework. Within this setting, a formal account of the notion of coordination, intended as management of interdependencies among agents activities, is also provided.},
author = {Davide Grossi and Frank Dignum and Lamber Royakkers and {\text{J.-J.Ch}}. Meyer},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Deontic Logic in Computer Science (DEON 2004), Madeira, Portugal, May 26-28, 2004},
editor = {A. Lomuscio and D. Nute},
keywords = {deon04},
number = {3065/2004},
pages = {129--145},
publisher = {Springer},
series = {LNCS},
title = {Collective Obligations and Agents: Who Gets the Blame?},
year = {2004}
}
@book{deon04,
editor = {A. Lomuscio and D. Nute},
isbn = {978-3-540-22111-1},
keywords = {deon04},
number = {3065/2004},
publisher = {Springer},
series = {LNCS},
title = {Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Deontic Logic in Computer Science (DEON 2004), Madeira, Portugal, May 26-28, 2004},
url = {http://springerlink.metapress.com/content/wt0cgl8br7y1/},
year = {2004},
bdsk-url-1 = {http://springerlink.metapress.com/content/wt0cgl8br7y1/}
}
This file was generated by bibtex2html 1.96.