ILLC-LIRa April 2018

illc-lira@list.uva.nl

1 participants
5 discussions

Tomorrow LIRa Session with Jakub Szymanik
by LIRa Seminar 25 Apr '18

25 Apr '18

Dear all, Tomorrow we will have our next LIRa session. Speaker: Jakub Szymanik Date and Time: Thursday, April 26th 2018, 16:00-17:30 Venue: ILLC Seminar Room F1.15, Science Park 107. Title: Logic as a Grammar of Thought Abstract. I will survey some recent work using logic as the underlying representation system (the language of thought) to explain various fragments of cognition. In this research program the computational techniques (e.g., machine learning, Bayesian modeling) are combined with logical representation languages to shed light on compositional structure of human thinking. Hope to see you there! The LIRa team

1 0

Tomorrow LIRa Session with Giuseppe Dari-Mattiacci
by LIRa Seminar 18 Apr '18

18 Apr '18

Dear all, Tomorrow we will have our next LIRa session. Speaker: Giuseppe Dari-Mattiacci Date and Time: Thursday, April 19th 2018, 16:00-17:30 Venue: ILLC Seminar Room F1.15, Science Park 107. Title: Mutual Persuasion (joint with Davide Grossi) Abstract: Two agents have to collectively select one of two options. They are endowed with a personal bias, each in favor of a different option, and they observe a private signal with known quality. They then need to reveal their private signal to the other agent, but may decide to withhold some of the evidence the private signal provides, in order to persuade the other agent in the direction of their own bias. We present a Bayesian model capturing this form of persuasion. The model applies to a variety of phenomena, including political discussions, settlement negotiations and trade. Hope to see you there! The LIRa team

1 0

Tomorrow LIRa Session with Alexandru Baltag
by LIRa Seminar 11 Apr '18

11 Apr '18

Dear all, Tomorrow we will have our next LIRa Session. Speaker: Alexandru Baltag Date and Time: Thursday, April 12th 2018, 16:30-18:00 Venue: ILLC Seminar Room F1.15, Science Park 107. Title: Some Thoughts on the Logic of Imprecise Observations Abstract: This talk is based on joint work with Johan van Benthem. We propose a dynamic-epistemic analysis of perceptual knowledge, taking as our starting point the paradoxes posed by Williamson\'s Margin of Error (MoE) principle. We argue that, contrary to initial intuitions, the specific entanglement between epistemic accessibility and perceptual closeness, that is claimed in the MoE principle, is untenable and inconsistent with daily experience and the theory of measurements. However, we think that it still contains valuable intuitions for a joint logic of closeness and knowledge, whose contours we develop, by placing structured observational events at center stage. In particular, our analysis explains how imprecise observation can lead to higher-precision knowledge, but also how can we find more plausible formalizations of MoE intuitions, in terms of principles limiting what can be learnt by perceptual observations. Hope to see you there! The LIRa team

1 0

Call for Abstracts: Colloquium on Reasoning in Social Context, Amsterdam 31 May - 2 June
by LIRa Seminar 06 Apr '18

06 Apr '18

Colloquium of the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences on: REASONING IN SOCIAL CONTEXT 31 MAY - 2 JUNE, 2018 Trippenhuis Building, Kloveniersburgwal 29, 1011 JV Amsterdam https://sites.google.com/site/reasoningcolloquium/home CALL FOR ABSTRACTS: We welcome submissions for short presentations on the theme of the colloquium. Submissions of 1 page abstracts (in pdf format) should be uploaded on the easychair submission webpage (https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=reasoning2018), by May 1st 2018. Authors will be notified of acceptance by May 7th 2018. DEADLINE ABSTRACTS: May 1st, 2018. THEME: The central question that we address in this colloquium focusses on the models that can represent the first level and higher-level beliefs of agents, their knowledge as well as the changes of beliefs and knowledge in a community. We aim to understand the nature of the logic that can model how the beliefs of agents in a group are affected by the opinions and belief changes of others in a social network. The logical study of belief formation, belief revision and knowledge updates in a community is gaining importance as these logical methods can be applied to a number of real life scenarios in the social sciences. A number of logical systems are already available to deal with the complex multi-agent scenarios in which an individual, or groups of agents, update their knowledge and change their beliefs. An important player in this field is dynamic epistemic logic, which refers to a collection of logical systems that are united in their method to deal with information dynamics. Guided by the methodology of dynamic epistemic logic, we approach the questions at this colloquium from an interdisciplinary angle. As such we welcome any insights on the topic coming from areas such as Game Theory, Belief Revision Theory, Formal Epistemology, Social Science, Network Theory, Cognitive Science and AI (multi-agent systems). The overall focus includes (but is not restricted to) the following topics: _ formal representations of higher-order belief, knowledge and belief revision strategies _ epistemic and doxastic influence _ belief merge _ information flow in social networks _ evidential support of epistemic attitudes _ trust and trust revision The LIRa team

1 0

Tomorrow LIRa Session with Aldo Ramirez-Abarca
by LIRa Seminar 04 Apr '18

04 Apr '18

Dear all, Tomorrow we will have our next LIRa Session. Speaker: Aldo Ramirez-Abarca Date and Time: Thursday, April 5th 2018, 16:00-17:30 Venue: ILLC Seminar Room F1.15, Science Park 107. Title: Playing with stit-fire Abstract: Stit logic has a strong connection to game theory. It is well known that some of the by-now established stit semantics were heavily inspired by game theoretical notions at their conception, under a clear correlation between ‘strategies’, on one hand, and ‘actions’, on the other. Furthermore, standards of game theory (such as utilities and dominance of strategies) have been explicitly imported into stit semantics to model different aspects of agentive behavior. A typical example is Horty’s (2001) stit formalization of obligation using weak dominance of strategies. It comes as no surprise, then, that the basic components for games (outcomes and individual/group/joint strategies) can be formalized with stit logic. This leads to what we may call game models for a stit language of individual/collective action (van Benthem & Pacuit, 2014; van de Putte, Tamminga, & Duijf, 2017). As it turns out, game models are in logical correspondence with a particular subclass of basic stit models (van de Putte, Tamminga, & Duijf, 2017). If we extend the basic stit language with both obligation and knowledge/belief operators, then, we can formalize traditional concepts found in richer representations of games (rationality, common knowledge, ex-interim/ex-ante/ ex-post knowledge, perfect/imperfect information, extensive-form-information games, uniformity of strategies, expected utility, solution concepts, etc.). The advantage of such a formalization is two-fold: in the game-theory-to-stit direction, it opens the door to producing highly applicable deontic epistemic/doxastic stit logics with intuitions grounded on the preexisting game-theoretical literature; in the stit-to-game-theory direction, it allows us to look for expressive axiomatizations of games, with syntactic formulas corresponding to complex semantic formulations of game constraints. In this talk, I will present an overview of the main results that evidence the connection between stit logic and game theory, and I will address a few proposals to further the use of this connection. Hope to see you there! The LIRa team

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

ILLC-LIRa April 2018