Dear all,
We will have our next LIRa session tomorrow, on Thursday, 30 September 16:30.
Please use our recurring zoom link:
https://uva-live.zoom.us/j/88142993494?pwd=d1BsQWR4T2UyK0Job29YNThjaGRkUT09
(Meeting ID: 881 4299 3494, Passcode: 352984)
You can find the details of the talk below.
Speaker: Johan van Benthem (Amsterdam, Stanford & Tsinghua)
Date and Time: Thursday, September 30th 2021, 16:30-18:00,
Amsterdam time.
Venue: online.
Title: Interleaving Logic and Counting
Abstract. Reasoning with generalized quantifiers in natural language
combines logical and arithmetical features, transcending divides
between qualitative and quantitative. This practice blends with
inference patterns in ‘grassroots mathematics’ such as pigeon-hole
principles. Our topic is this cooperation of logic and counting,
studied with small systems and gradually moving upward. We start with
monadic first-order logic with counting. We provide normal forms that
allow for axiomatization, determine which arithmetical notions are
definable, and conversely, discuss which logical notions can be
defined out of arithmetical ones, and what sort of (non-)classical
logics are induced. Next we study a series of strengthenings in the
same style, including second-order versions, systems with multiple
counting, and a new modal logic with counting. As a complement to our
fragment approach, we also discuss another way of controlling
complexity: changing the semantics of counting to reason about
‘mass’ or other aggregating notions than cardinalities. Finally,
we return to natural language, confronting the architecture of our
formal systems with linguistic quantifier vocabulary, modules such as
monotonicity reasoning, and the procedural semantics via semantic
automata. We conclude with some thoughts on further entanglements of
logic and counting in formal systems, on rethinking the
qualitative/quantitative divide, and on empirical aspects of our
findings.
Hope to see you there!
The LIRa team
Dear all,
The following event may be interesting to some in the LIRa audience:
----------------------------------------------
This Thursday, the 30th of September at 11am there will be a DIEP seminar with Michel Mandjes on:
Title: A diffusion-based analysis of a road traffic network
Abstract: In this talk I will discuss an important example of complex networks, namely road traffic networks. I start by giving an overview of the existing literature, distinguishing between microscopic models (describing the stochastic evolution of the position of individual vehicles) and macroscopic models (built around deterministic continuous flows, represented as partial differential equations). Then I argue that the “optimal" model is a compromise between these: we aim at a stochastic model with enough aggregation to make sure that explicit limiting analysis can be performed. The underlying dynamics are consistent with the macroscopic fundamental diagram that describes the functional relation between the vehicle density and velocity. Discretizing space, the model can be phrased in terms of a spatial population process, thus allowing the application of a classical scaling approach. More specifically, it follows that under a diffusion scaling, the vehicle density process can be approximated by an appropriate Gaussian process. This Gaussian approximation can be used to evaluate the travel time distribution between a given origin and destination. Based on joint work with Jaap Storm (VU).
Zoom link: https://uva-live.zoom.us/j/85608909905
----------------------------------------------
The LIRa team
Dear all,
We will have our next LIRa session on Thursday, 30 September 16:30.
Please use our recurring zoom link:
https://uva-live.zoom.us/j/88142993494?pwd=d1BsQWR4T2UyK0Job29YNThjaGRkUT09
(Meeting ID: 881 4299 3494, Passcode: 352984)
You can find the details of the talk below.
Speaker: Johan van Benthem (Amsterdam, Stanford & Tsinghua)
Date and Time: Thursday, September 30th 2021, 16:30-18:00,
Amsterdam time.
Venue: online.
Title: Interleaving Logic and Counting
Abstract. Reasoning with generalized quantifiers in natural language
combines logical and arithmetical features, transcending divides
between qualitative and quantitative. This practice blends with
inference patterns in ‘grassroots mathematics’ such as pigeon-hole
principles. Our topic is this cooperation of logic and counting,
studied with small systems and gradually moving upward. We start with
monadic first-order logic with counting. We provide normal forms that
allow for axiomatization, determine which arithmetical notions are
definable, and conversely, discuss which logical notions can be
defined out of arithmetical ones, and what sort of (non-)classical
logics are induced. Next we study a series of strengthenings in the
same style, including second-order versions, systems with multiple
counting, and a new modal logic with counting. As a complement to our
fragment approach, we also discuss another way of controlling
complexity: changing the semantics of counting to reason about
‘mass’ or other aggregating notions than cardinalities. Finally,
we return to natural language, confronting the architecture of our
formal systems with linguistic quantifier vocabulary, modules such as
monotonicity reasoning, and the procedural semantics via semantic
automata. We conclude with some thoughts on further entanglements of
logic and counting in formal systems, on rethinking the
qualitative/quantitative divide, and on empirical aspects of our
findings.
Hope to see you there!
The LIRa team
Dear all,
We will have our next LIRa session tomorrow, on Thursday, 23 September 16:30.
Please use our recurring zoom link:
https://uva-live.zoom.us/j/88142993494?pwd=d1BsQWR4T2UyK0Job29YNThjaGRkUT09
(Meeting ID: 881 4299 3494, Passcode: 352984)
You can find the details of the talk below.
Speaker: Hans Rott
Date and Time: Thursday, September 23rd 2021, 16:30-18:00,
Amsterdam time.
Venue: online.
Title: Difference-making and 'Because'
Abstract. Causes make a difference to their effects, explanantia make
a difference to their explananda, reasons make a difference to what
they are reasons for. The paradigmatic way of reporting about causal,
explanatory or reason relations is in the form of sentences using
'because' or its stylistic variant 'since'. Such sentences thus
express that the antecedent makes a difference to the consequent. We
suggest to analyze 'because' with the help of a difference-making
conditional ». The latter is stronger than the usual suppositional
conditional >. A»C can be defined by the conjunction of (i) A>C
and (ii) ¬(¬A>C). We show that the logic of difference making can
be extended to get a logic for 'C because A' by adding the clauses
that (iii) A is true/accepted and (iv) C is true/accepted. We show
that under a rather standard analysis of the suppositional
conditional, the analysis of 'C because A' reduces to just (ii) and
(iv). In other words, an explanation of C by A implies that the
explanandum C is true or believed to be true, and it also implies the
might conditional 'If ¬A had been the case, ¬C might have been the
case.'
References:
- Eric Raidl, 'Definable conditionals', Topoi 40(1), 2021, 87-105.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-020-09704-3
- Hans Rott, 'Difference-making conditionals and the Relevant Ramsey
Test', Review of Symbolic Logic, online Dec 2019,
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1755020319000674.
Hope to see you there!
The LIRa team
Dear all,
We will have our next LIRa session on Thursday, 23 September 16:30.
Please use our recurring zoom link:
https://uva-live.zoom.us/j/88142993494?pwd=d1BsQWR4T2UyK0Job29YNThjaGRkUT09
(Meeting ID: 881 4299 3494, Passcode: 352984)
You can find the details of the talk below.
Speaker: Hans Rott
Date and Time: Thursday, September 23rd 2021, 16:30-18:00,
Amsterdam time.
Venue: online.
Title: Difference-making and 'Because'
Abstract. Causes make a difference to their effects, explanantia make
a difference to their explananda, reasons make a difference to what
they are reasons for. The paradigmatic way of reporting about causal,
explanatory or reason relations is in the form of sentences using
'because' or its stylistic variant 'since'. Such sentences thus
express that the antecedent makes a difference to the consequent. We
suggest to analyze 'because' with the help of a difference-making
conditional ». The latter is stronger than the usual suppositional
conditional >. A»C can be defined by the conjunction of (i) A>C
and (ii) ¬(¬A>C). We show that the logic of difference making can
be extended to get a logic for 'C because A' by adding the clauses
that (iii) A is true/accepted and (iv) C is true/accepted. We show
that under a rather standard analysis of the suppositional
conditional, the analysis of 'C because A' reduces to just (ii) and
(iv). In other words, an explanation of C by A implies that the
explanandum C is true or believed to be true, and it also implies the
might conditional 'If ¬A had been the case, ¬C might have been the
case.'
References:
- Eric Raidl, 'Definable conditionals', Topoi 40(1), 2021, 87-105.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-020-09704-3
- Hans Rott, 'Difference-making conditionals and the Relevant Ramsey
Test', Review of Symbolic Logic, online Dec 2019,
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1755020319000674.
Hope to see you there!
The LIRa team
Dear all,
Tomorrow we will have our next LIRa session.
Please use our recurring zoom link:
https://uva-live.zoom.us/j/88142993494?pwd=d1BsQWR4T2UyK0Job29YNThjaGRkUT09
(Meeting ID: 881 4299 3494, Passcode: 352984)
You can find the details of the talk below.
Speaker: Sonja Smets
Date and Time: Thursday, September 16th 2021, 16:30-18:00,
Amsterdam time.
Venue: online.
Title: Learning what Others Know
Abstract.
I will present recent work on modelling scenarios in which agents read
or communicate (or somehow gain access to) all the information stored
at specific sources, or possessed by some other agents (including
information of a non-propositional nature, such as data, passwords
etc). Modelling such scenarios requires us to extend the framework of
epistemic logics to one in which we abstract away from the specific
announcement and formalize directly the action of sharing ‘all you
know’ (with some or all of the other agents). In order to do this,
we introduce a general framework for such informational events, that
subsumes actions such as “sharing all you know” with a group or
individual, giving one access to some folder or database, hacking a
database without the owner\'s knowledge, etc. We formalize their
effect, i.e. the state of affairs in which one agent (or group of
agents) has ‘epistemic superiority’ over another agent (or group).
Concretely, we express epistemic superiority using comparative
epistemic assertions between individuals and groups (as such extending
the comparison-types considered in [5]). Another ingredient is a new
modal operator for \'common distributed knowledge\', that combines
features of both common knowledge and distributed knowledge, and
characterizes situations in which common knowledge can be gained in a
larger group of agents (formed of a number of subgroups) by
communication only within each of the subgroups. We position this work
in the context of other known work such as: the problem of converting
distributed knowledge into common knowledge via acts of sharing [4];
the more semantic approach in [2] on communication protocols requiring
agents to ‘tell everybody all they know’; the work on public
sharing events with a version of common distributed knowledge in [3];
and the work on resolution actions in [6].
This presentation is based on joint work with Alexandru Baltag in [1],
and it subsumes and extends the material presented by Alexandru in his
LIRa presentation in February 2020.
[1] A. Baltag and S. Smets, Learning what others know, in L. Kovacs
and E. Albert (eds.), LPAR23 proceedings of the International
Conference on Logic for Programming, AI and Reasoning, EPiC Series in
Computing, 73:90-110, 2020. https://doi.org/10.29007/plm4
[2] A. Baltag and S. Smets, Protocols for Belief Merge: Reaching
Agreement via Communication, Logic Journal of the IGPL, 21(3):468-487,
2013. https://doi.org/10.1093/jigpal/jzs049
[3] A. Baltag, What is DEL good for? Lecture at the
ESSLLI2010-Workshop on Logic, Rationality and Intelligent Interaction,
16 August 2010.
[4] J. van Benthem, One is a lonely number. In P. Koepke Z.
Chatzidakis and W. Pohlers, (eds.) Logic Colloquium 2002, 96-129, ASL
and A.K. Peters, Wellesley MA, 2002.
[5] H. van Ditmarsch, W. van der Hoek & B. Kooi, Knowing More -
from Global to Local Correspondence, Proc. of IJCAI-09, 955--960,
2009.
[6] T. Agotnes and Y.N. Wang, Resolving Distributed Knowledge,
Artificial Intelligence, 252: 1--21, 2017.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artint.2017.07.002
Hope to see you there!
The LIRa team
Dear all,
We will have our next LIRa session next week.
Please use our recurring zoom link: https://uva-live.zoom.us/j/88142993494?pwd=d1BsQWR4T2UyK0Job29YNThjaGRkUT09
(Meeting ID: 881 4299 3494, Passcode: 352984)
You can find the details of the talk below.
Speaker: Sonja Smets
Date and Time: Thursday, September 16th 2021, 16:30-18:00,
Amsterdam time.
Venue: online.
Title: Learning what Others Know
Abstract.
I will present recent work on modelling scenarios in which agents read
or communicate (or somehow gain access to) all the information stored
at specific sources, or possessed by some other agents (including
information of a non-propositional nature, such as data, passwords
etc). Modelling such scenarios requires us to extend the framework of
epistemic logics to one in which we abstract away from the specific
announcement and formalize directly the action of sharing ‘all you
know’ (with some or all of the other agents). In order to do this,
we introduce a general framework for such informational events, that
subsumes actions such as “sharing all you know” with a group or
individual, giving one access to some folder or database, hacking a
database without the owner\'s knowledge, etc. We formalize their
effect, i.e. the state of affairs in which one agent (or group of
agents) has ‘epistemic superiority’ over another agent (or group).
Concretely, we express epistemic superiority using comparative
epistemic assertions between individuals and groups (as such extending
the comparison-types considered in [5]). Another ingredient is a new
modal operator for \'common distributed knowledge\', that combines
features of both common knowledge and distributed knowledge, and
characterizes situations in which common knowledge can be gained in a
larger group of agents (formed of a number of subgroups) by
communication only within each of the subgroups. We position this work
in the context of other known work such as: the problem of converting
distributed knowledge into common knowledge via acts of sharing [4];
the more semantic approach in [2] on communication protocols requiring
agents to ‘tell everybody all they know’; the work on public
sharing events with a version of common distributed knowledge in [3];
and the work on resolution actions in [6].
This presentation is based on joint work with Alexandru Baltag in [1],
and it subsumes and extends the material presented by Alexandru in his
LIRa presentation in February 2020.
[1] A. Baltag and S. Smets, Learning what others know, in L. Kovacs
and E. Albert (eds.), LPAR23 proceedings of the International
Conference on Logic for Programming, AI and Reasoning, EPiC Series in
Computing, 73:90-110, 2020. https://doi.org/10.29007/plm4
[2] A. Baltag and S. Smets, Protocols for Belief Merge: Reaching
Agreement via Communication, Logic Journal of the IGPL, 21(3):468-487,
2013. https://doi.org/10.1093/jigpal/jzs049
[3] A. Baltag, What is DEL good for? Lecture at the
ESSLLI2010-Workshop on Logic, Rationality and Intelligent Interaction,
16 August 2010.
[4] J. van Benthem, One is a lonely number. In P. Koepke Z.
Chatzidakis and W. Pohlers, (eds.) Logic Colloquium 2002, 96-129, ASL
and A.K. Peters, Wellesley MA, 2002.
[5] H. van Ditmarsch, W. van der Hoek & B. Kooi, Knowing More -
from Global to Local Correspondence, Proc. of IJCAI-09, 955--960,
2009.
[6] T. Agotnes and Y.N. Wang, Resolving Distributed Knowledge,
Artificial Intelligence, 252: 1--21, 2017.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artint.2017.07.002
Hope to see you there!
The LIRa team
Dear all,
We will start again with the LIRa seminar in two weeks from today.
Our first talk of the semester will be given by Sonja Smets on 16 September at 16:30, online via Zoom.
You can find the details of the talk below.
Speaker: Sonja Smets
Date and Time: Thursday, September 16th 2021, 16:30-18:00, Amsterdam time.
Venue: online. A link to join the session will be included in the next reminder e-mail.
Title: Learning what Others Know
Abstract.
I will present recent work on modelling scenarios in which agents read
or communicate (or somehow gain access to) all the information stored
at specific sources, or possessed by some other agents (including
information of a non-propositional nature, such as data, passwords
etc). Modelling such scenarios requires us to extend the framework of
epistemic logics to one in which we abstract away from the specific
announcement and formalize directly the action of sharing ‘all you
know’ (with some or all of the other agents). In order to do this,
we introduce a general framework for such informational events, that
subsumes actions such as “sharing all you know” with a group or
individual, giving one access to some folder or database, hacking a
database without the owner\'s knowledge, etc. We formalize their
effect, i.e. the state of affairs in which one agent (or group of
agents) has ‘epistemic superiority’ over another agent (or group).
Concretely, we express epistemic superiority using comparative
epistemic assertions between individuals and groups (as such extending
the comparison-types considered in [5]). Another ingredient is a new
modal operator for \'common distributed knowledge\', that combines
features of both common knowledge and distributed knowledge, and
characterizes situations in which common knowledge can be gained in a
larger group of agents (formed of a number of subgroups) by
communication only within each of the subgroups. We position this
work in the context of other known work such as: the problem of
converting distributed knowledge into common knowledge via acts of
sharing [4]; the more semantic approach in [2] on communication
protocols requiring agents to ‘tell everybody all they know’; the
work on public sharing events with a version of common distributed
knowledge in [3]; and the work on resolution actions in [6].
This presentation is based on joint work with Alexandru Baltag in [1],
and it subsumes and extends the material presented by Alexandru in his
LIRa presentation in February 2020.
[1] A. Baltag and S. Smets, Learning what others know, in L. Kovacs
and E. Albert (eds.), LPAR23 proceedings of the International
Conference on Logic for Programming, AI and Reasoning, EPiC Series in
Computing, 73:90-110, 2020. https://doi.org/10.29007/plm4
[2] A. Baltag and S. Smets, Protocols for Belief Merge: Reaching
Agreement via Communication, Logic Journal of the IGPL, 21(3):468-487,
2013. https://doi.org/10.1093/jigpal/jzs049
[3] A. Baltag, What is DEL good for? Lecture at the
ESSLLI2010-Workshop on Logic, Rationality and Intelligent Interaction,
16 August 2010.
[4] J. van Benthem, One is a lonely number. In P. Koepke Z.
Chatzidakis and W. Pohlers, (eds.) Logic Colloquium 2002, 96-129, ASL
and A.K. Peters, Wellesley MA, 2002.
[5] H. van Ditmarsch, W. van der Hoek & B. Kooi, Knowing More -
from Global to Local Correspondence, Proc. of IJCAI-09, 955--960,
2009.
[6] T. Agotnes and Y.N. Wang, Resolving Distributed Knowledge,
Artificial Intelligence, 252: 1--21, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artint.2017.07.002
Hope to see you there!
The LIRa team