Logic, Rational Agency, and Intelligent Interaction

Johan van Benthem,C. Glymour,W. Wang,D. Westerståhl

2010-01-01

Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene

Abstract:We make a plea for recasting logic as a theory of interactive agency, and show how this perspective fits both old achievements and new broader ambitions for the field.

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Logic and Intelligent Interaction

Thomas Ågotnes,Johan van Benthem,Eric Pacuit

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-009-9558-0

IF: 1.595

2009-01-01

Synthese

Abstract:You can think about planet Earth and its natural place for centuries, but to see how it really moves, you need to know the solar system, and all the bodies that interact with it.The basic laws of gravity are about 'social' push and pull.And what is true of physical bodies, is even more true of our human world, where bodies also have minds.You can think about human beings as isolated information processors as much as you want, turning them into idealized mathematicians serving a life sentence in Platonic Heaven, but if you want to understand the dynamics that gives human actions sense, you need to understand our information about and responses to others.And indeed, there is a fast-growing interest in dynamic logics that deal with 'intelligent interaction' (the happy title of a current EC strategic research program 1 ) in communities of rational, or perhaps not so rational agents.There is also a fast-growing jungle of formal systems, sometimes with a 'religious' following as so often is the case in early stages of a field.The Workshop that led to the present volume was held at the
Merging Observation and Access in Dynamic Logic

Johan van Benthem

2008-01-01

Abstract:Rational agents base their actions on information from observation, inference, introspection, or other sources. But this information comes in different kinds, and it is usually handled by different logical mechanisms. We discuss how to integrate external ‘updating information’ and internal ‘elucidating information’ into one system of dynamic epistemic logic, by distinguishing two basic informational actions: ‘bare seeing’ versus ‘conscious realization’. 1 Rational agency, logic, and the problem of information diversity Logical dynamics in rational agency Was Gödel’s diary kept in German or in English? I can fly to Princeton and check (if Google Earth does not zoom in that close these days), or try to infer the answer in comfort at home from the facts in John Dawson’s biography, or failing all that, I might call some East Coast friend who knows the answer. Rational agents have a great variety of ways for getting new information, and they use it for a great variety of purposes. Observation, inference, and communication all seem equally respectable ways for agents to obtain information, and in the program of ‘logical dynamics’ (van Benthem 1996), they should indeed all be handled on a par. In my paper ‘Tell it Like It Is’ (Journal of Peking University, Humanities and Social Science Edition, No. 1, 2008, pp. 80 – 90), I describe the logical challenges which arise in this way, sketching how current dynamic logics of information update, belief revision, preference change, and strategic interaction all address aspects of this total behaviour of rational agents, which then need to be integrated. 1 In particular, since all these activities are information-driven, our logical systems need to be able to integrate the various kinds of information that are relevant to the above picture. But then, we have a problem of compatibility – and it is of long standing by now: 1 The further paper ‘Logic, Rational Agency, and Intelligent Interaction’, an invited lecture at the 13 International Congress of Logic, Methodology, and Philosophy of Science, Beijing 2007, Proceedings to appear with College Publications, London, lays out the program in greater detail.
Decisions, Actions, and Games: A Logical Perspective

Johan van Benthem

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-92701-3_1

2008-01-01

Abstract:Over the past decades, logicians interested in rational agency and intelligent interaction studied major components of these phenomena, such as knowledge, belief, and preference. In recent years, standard ‘static’ logics describing information states of agents have been generalized to dynamic logics describing actions and events that produce information, revise beliefs, or change preferences, as explicit parts of the logical system. [22], [1], [12] are up-to-date accounts of this dynamic trend (the present paper follows Chapter 9 of the latter book). But in reality, concrete rational agency contains all these dynamic processes entangled. A concrete setting for this entanglement are games – and this paper is a survey of their interfaces with logic, both static and dynamic. Games are intriguing also since their analysis brings together two major streams, or tribal communities: ‘hard’ mathematical logics of computation, and ‘soft’ philosophical logics of propositional attitudes. Of course, this hard/soft distinction is spurious, and there is no natural border line between the two sources: it is their congenial mixture that makes current theories of agency so lively.
Logical Dynamics Meets Logical Pluralism?

Johan van Benthem

DOI: https://doi.org/10.26686/ajl.v6i0.1801

2008-01-01

Abstract:Where is logic heading today? There is a general feeling that the discipline is broadening its scope and agenda beyond classical foundational issues, and maybe even a concern that, like Stephen Leacock’s famous horseman, it is ‘riding off madly in all directions’. So, what is the resultant vector? There seem to be two broad answers in circulation today. One is logical pluralism, locating the new scope of logic in charting a wide variety of reasoning styles, often marked by non-classical structural rules of inference. This is the new program that I subscribed to in my work on sub-structural logics around 1990, and it is a powerful movement today. But gradually, I have changed my mind about the crux of what logic should become. I would now say that the main issue is not variety of reasoning styles and notions of consequence, but the variety of informational tasks performed by intelligent interacting agents, of which inference is only one among many, involving observation, memory, questions and answers, dialogue, or general communication. And logical systems should deal with a wide variety of these, making information-carrying events first-class citizens in their set-up. The purpose of this brief paper is to contrast and compare the two approaches, drawing freely on some insights from earlier published papers. In particular, I will argue that logical dynamics sets itself the more ambitious diagnostic goal of explaining why substructural phenomena occur, by ‘deconstructing’ them into classical logic plus an explicit account of the relevant informational events.
Logico-Computational Aspects of Rationality

Johan van Benthem,Fenrong Liu,Sonja Smets

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/11252.003.0017

2019-01-01

Abstract:Taking a broad historical line, we discuss major aspects of rationality that can be analyzed in a logical and computational perspective. Topics include classical notions from the foundations of computability, insights from the development of computer science and AI, and the richer picture of rationality emerging in current logical studies of agency. We also discuss two challenges. Distributed computing and evolutionary games replace ’high rationality’ by ’low rationality’ in behavior, machine learning defies classical views of representation and inference. Both trigger new logical themes in the study of rationality.
Toward a Theory of Play: A Logical Perspective on Games and Interaction.

Johan van Benthem,Eric Pacuit,Olivier Roy

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/g2010052

2011-01-01

Games

Abstract:Logic and game theory have had a few decades of contacts by now, with the classical results of epistemic game theory as major high-lights. In this paper, we emphasize a recent new perspective toward “logical dynamics”, designing logical systems that focus on the actions that change information, preference, and other driving forces of agency. We show how this dynamic turn works out for games, drawing on some recent advances in the literature. Our key examples are the long-term dynamics of information exchange, as well as the much-discussed issue of extensive game rationality. Our paper also proposes a new broader interpretation of what is happening here. The combination of logic and game theory provides a fine-grained perspective on information and interaction dynamics, and we are witnessing the birth of something new which is not just logic, nor just game theory, but rather a Theory of Play.
Logic in A Social Setting

Johan van Benthem

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3366/epi.2011.0019

2011-01-01

Episteme

Abstract:Taking Backward Induction as its running example, this paper explores avenues for a logic of information-driven social action. We use recent results on limit phenomena in knowledge updating and belief revision, procedural rationality, and a 'Theory of Play' analyzing how games are played by different agents.
Logic and Reasoning: Do the Facts Matter?

Johan van Benthem

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11225-008-9101-1

2008-01-01

Studia Logica

Abstract:Modern logic is undergoing a cognitive turn, side-stepping Frege’s ‘antipsychologism’. Collaborations between logicians and colleagues in more empirical fields are growing, especially in research on reasoning and information update by intelligent agents. We place this border-crossing research in the context of long-standing contacts between logic and empirical facts, since pure normativity has never been a plausible stance. We also discuss what the fall of Frege’s Wall means for a new agenda of logic as a theory of rational agency, and what might then be a viable understanding of ‘psychologism’ as a friend rather than an enemy of logical theory.
A Mini-Guide to Logic in Action

Johan van Benthem

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110333213.419

2013-01-01

Abstract:Classical logic is about propositions which we can know or believe, and unchanging inferential relationships between them. But inference is first and foremost an activity, for which propositions are merely the input, and the result. In recent years, there has been a growing awareness that various activities of reasoning, evaluation, belief revision, or communication, are themselves typical themes for logical investigation, and that their dynamic structure can be studied explicitly by logical means. 1 For instance, it seems strange to study only the statics of what it means to 'know' a proposition, when knowledge usually results from basic actions of learning that we perform all the time, such as asking a question and getting an answer. Indeed, asking questions and giving answers are just as much logical core activities as drawing conclusions! This line can be extended: the natural dynamic counterpart of static epistemic logic is the theory of arbitrary individual or social learning mechanisms. Similar trajectories from static to dynamic arise when we look at inference in such stages, first as a zero-agent mathematical relationship between static propositions, then as a one-agent activity of drawing conclusions, and finally as a many-agent interactive process of argumentation. This broadening of perspective, sometimes called the 'Dynamic Turn', started around 1980 with work on interpretation procedures for natural language, as well as belief revision in artificial intelligence. But how should logic incorporate actions as first-class citizens into its scope? Plausible formal frameworks to this effect come from the philosophy of action, temporal
Natural Language and Logic of Agency

Johan van Benthem

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10849-014-9188-x

2014-01-01

Journal of Logic Language and Information

Abstract:This light piece reflects on analogies between two often disjoint streams of research: the logical semantics and pragmatics of natural language and dynamic logics of general information-driven agency. The two areas show significant overlap in themes and tools, and yet, the focus seems subtly different in each, defying a simple comparison. We discuss some unusual questions that emerge when the two are put side by side, without any pretense at covering the whole literature or at reaching definitive conclusions.
Where is Logic Going, and Should It?

Johan van Benthem

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-006-0018-x

2005-01-01

Abstract:Modern logic is about information flow and communication far beyond its traditional agenda of inference and meaning. This makes it a player at a central academic interface between many disciplines, where normative and descriptive stances, often thought to be at odds, meet in creating new practices which also affect reality. This same theatre is where philosophy in general would thrive, if it so wished.
Benthem Logic and Reasoning : do the facts matter ?

Johan van

2008-01-01

Abstract:Modern logic is undergoing a cognitive turn, side-stepping Frege’s ‘antipsychologism’. Collaborations between logicians and colleagues in more empirical fields are growing, especially in research on reasoning and information update by intelligent agents. We place this border-crossing research in the context of long-standing contacts between logic and empirical facts, since pure normativity has never been a plausible stance. We also discuss what the fall of Frege’s Wall means for a new agenda of logic as a theory of rational agency, and what might then be a viable understanding of ‘psychologism’ as a friend rather than an enemy of logical theory.
Abduction at the Interface of Logic and Philosophy of Science

Johan Van Benthem

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1387/theoria.447

2009-01-01

THEORIA An International Journal for Theory History and Foundations of Science

Abstract:Despite their growing separation over the years, logic and philosophy of science should still be allies pursuing an agenda of rational agency ranging from specific mechanisms like abduction to the broader study of reasoning, belief revision, learning, and intelligent interaction.
Modeling Reasoning in a Social Setting

Johan van Benthem

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11225-014-9543-6

2014-01-01

Studia Logica

Abstract:In this survey and position paper, we discuss some issues in logical modeling of interactive behavior. We draw together a number of lines in current logics for social action, emphasizing uses of ‘small models’ rather than complex spaces.
Logic and the Dynamics of Information

Johan van Benthem

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1026296600182

2003-01-01

Abstract:We discuss how issues of information and computation interact with logic today, and what might be a natural extended agenda of investigation.
The logic of empirical theories revisited

Johan van Benthem

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-011-9916-6

IF: 1.595

2011-01-01

Synthese

Abstract:Logic and philosophy of science share a long history, though contacts have gone through ups and downs. This paper is a brief survey of some major themes in logical studies of empirical theories, including links to computer science and current studies of rational agency. The survey has no new results: we just try to make some things into common knowledge.
Reasoning in Social Settings

Fenrong Liu,Beishui Liao

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/logcom/exab039

2021-01-01

Journal of Logic and Computation

Abstract:New perspectives keep emerging in the logical study of social interactions, witnessed by yet another collection of research papers. Once our focus of reasoning shifts from an individual to a social setting, interesting issues naturally arise. The central question is the following: how is an individual’s attitude related to that of others and that of a group, especially when we take into account the informative communication between agents, as well as the structures of a group? This has been studied to various extent in social epistemology, social choice theory, social norms theory, etc. In this context, our main concern is logic: how can a logical approach shed light on our reasoning about these scenarios? We are not giving a comprehensive overview but just to mention some research that is mostly relevant. Communication between agents, public or private, has been extensively studied in dynamic epistemic logic (e.g. [1, 9...
Rational dynamics in game theory

Johan van Benthem

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511974533.016

2011-01-01

Abstract:Games are an arena where all strands of rational agency and interaction come together. In Chapter 10, we showed how extensive games fit well with dynamic logics of knowledge, belief, and preference, adding an account of mid- and long-term agency. In principle, this has made all points about games that are relevant to the main line of this book. For readers who have not had enough of games yet, in this chapter we show how logical dynamics interfaces with game theory, in particular, solution procedures for games in strategic form. Our main tool is iterated public announcement, and our style will be more impressionist.
Logic and Interactive RAtionality Yearbook 2012

Z. Christoff,P. Galeazzi,Nina Gierasimczuk,A. Marcoci,S. Smets,J. Benthem,Chanjuan Liu,Fenrong Liu,J. Eijck,A. Baltag,J. Bergfeld,K. Kishida,J. Sack,S. Smets,S. Zhong,Branden Fitelson,R. Parikh,M. Kaneko,V. Hendricks,Peter Hawke,Tai-Wei Hu

2014-01-01

Abstract:The theories of Nash noncooperative solutions and of rationalizability intend to describe the same target problem of ex ante individual decision making, but they are distinctively different. We consider what their essential difference is by giving a unified approach and parallel derivations of their resulting outcomes. Our results show that the only difference lies in the use of quantifiers for each player’s predictions about the other’s possible decisions; the universal quantifier for the former and the existential quantifier for the latter. Based on this unified approach, we discuss the statuses of those theories from the three points of views: Johansen’s postulates, the free-will postulate vs. complete determinism, and prediction/decision criteria. One conclusion we reach is that the Nash theory is coherent with the free-will postulate, but we would meet various difficulties with the rationalizability theory.
Logic in Games

Johan van Benthem

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9674.001.0001

2014-01-01

Abstract:A comprehensive examination of the interfaces of logic, computer science, and game theory, drawing on twenty years of research on logic and games.This book draws on ideas from philosophical logic, computational logic, multi-agent systems, and game theory to offer a comprehensive account of logic and games viewed in two complementary ways. It examines the logic of games: the development of sophisticated modern dynamic logics that model information flow, communication, and interactive structures in games. It also examines logic as games: the idea that logical activities of reasoning and many related tasks can be viewed in the form of games.In doing so, the book takes up the “intelligent interaction” of agents engaging in competitive or cooperative activities and examines the patterns of strategic behavior that arise. It develops modern logical systems that can analyze information-driven changes in players' knowledge and beliefs, and introduces the “Theory of Play” that emerges from the combination of logic and game theory. This results in a new view of logic itself as an interactive rational activity based on reasoning, perception, and communication that has particular relevance for games.Logic in Games, based on a course taught by the author at Stanford University, the University of Amsterdam, and elsewhere, can be used in advanced seminars and as a resource for researchers.

Logic, Rational Agency, and Intelligent Interaction

Logic and Intelligent Interaction

Merging Observation and Access in Dynamic Logic

Decisions, Actions, and Games: A Logical Perspective

Logical Dynamics Meets Logical Pluralism?

Logico-Computational Aspects of Rationality

Toward a Theory of Play: A Logical Perspective on Games and Interaction.

Logic in A Social Setting

Logic and Reasoning: Do the Facts Matter?

A Mini-Guide to Logic in Action

Natural Language and Logic of Agency

Where is Logic Going, and Should It?

Benthem Logic and Reasoning : do the facts matter ?

Abduction at the Interface of Logic and Philosophy of Science

Modeling Reasoning in a Social Setting

Logic and the Dynamics of Information

The logic of empirical theories revisited

Reasoning in Social Settings

Rational dynamics in game theory

Logic and Interactive RAtionality Yearbook 2012

Logic in Games