Tomohiro Hoshi

Merging Frameworks for Interaction

A variety of logical frameworks have been developed to study rational agents interacting over time. This paper takes a closer look at one particular interface, between two systems that both address the dynamics of knowledge and information flow. The first is Epistemic Temporal Logic (ETL) which uses linear or branching time models with added epistemic structure induced by agents’ different capabilities for observing events. The second framework is Dynamic Epistemic Logic (DEL) that describes interactive processes in terms of epistemic event models which may occur inside modalities of the language. This paper systematically and rigorously relates the DEL framework with the ETL framework. The precise relationship between DEL and ETL is explored via a new representation theorem characterizing the largest class of ETL models corresponding to DEL protocols in terms of notions of Perfect Recall, No Miracles, and Bisimulation Invariance. We then focus on new issues of completeness. One contribution is an axiomatization for the dynamic logic of public announcements constrained by protocols, which has been an open problem for some years, as it does not fit the usual ‘reduction axiom’ format of DEL. Finally, we provide a number of examples that show how DEL suggests an interesting fine-structure inside ETL.

‘KNOWABLE’ AS ‘KNOWN AFTER AN ANNOUNCEMENT’

Public announcement logic is an extension of multi-agent epistemic logic with dynamic operators to model the informational consequences of announcements to the entire group of agents. We propose an extension of public announcement logic with a dynamic modal operator that expresses what is true after any announcement: ♦ϕ expresses that there is a truthful announcement ψ after which ϕ is true. This logic gives a perspective on Fitch’s knowability issues: for which formulas ϕ does it hold that ϕ → ♦Kϕ? We give various semantic results, and we show completeness for a Hilbert-style axiomatization of this logic. There is a natural generalization to a logic for arbitrary events.

Taking mistakes seriously: equivalence notions for game scenarios with off equilibrium play

This paper investigates strategies for responding rationally to opponents who make mistakes. We identify two distinct interpretations of mistakes in the game theory literature: trembling hand and risk averse mistakes. We introduce the concept of an EFG Scenario, a game plus strategy profile, in order to probe the properties of these different types of mistake. An analysis of equivalence preserving transformations over EFG Scenarios reveals that risk averse mistakes are a form of rational play, while trembling hand mistakes are equivalent to moves by nature.

What can we achieve by arbitrary announcements?: A dynamic take on Fitch's knowability

Public announcement logic is an extension of multi-agent epistemic logic with dynamic operators to model the informational consequences of announcements to the entire group of agents. We propose an extension of public announcement logic with a dynamic modal operator that expresses what is true after any announcement: □ϕ expresses that ϕ is true after an arbitrary announcement ψ. As this includes the trivial announcement ⊤, one might as well say that □ϕ expresses what remains true after any announcement: it therefore corresponds to truth persistence after (definable) relativisation. The dual operation ⋄ϕ expresses that there is an announcement after which ϕ. This gives a perspective on Fitchs knowability issues: for which formulas ϕ does it hold that ϕ → ⋄Kϕ? We give various semantic results, and we show completeness for a Hilbert-style axiomatisation of this logic.

Schematic validity in dynamic epistemic logic: decidability

Unlike standard modal logics, many dynamic epistemic logics are not closed under uniform substitution. The classic example is Public Announcement Logic (PAL), an extension of epistemic logic based on the idea of information acquisition as elimination of possibilities. In this paper, we address the open question of whether the set of schematic validities of PAL, the set of formulas all of whose substitution instances are valid, is decidable. We obtain positive answers for multi-agent PAL, as well as its extension with relativized common knowledge, PAL-RC. The conceptual significance of substitution failure is also discussed.

Synchronizing Diachronic Uncertainty

Diachronic uncertainty, uncertainty about where an agent falls in time, poses interesting conceptual difficulties. Although the agent is uncertain about where she falls in time, this uncertainty can only obtain at a particular moment in time. We resolve this conceptual tension by providing a transformation from models with diachronic uncertainty relations into “equivalent” models with only synchronic uncertainty relations. The former are interpreted as capturing the causal structure of a situation, while the latter are interpreted as capturing its epistemic structure. The models are equivalent in the sense that agents pass through the same information sets in the same order, In this paper, we investigate how such a transformation may be used to define an appropriate notion of equivalence, which we call epistemic equivalence. Although our project is motivated by problems which have arisen in a variety of disciplines, especially philosophy and game theory, our formal development takes place within the general and flexible framework provided by epistemic temporal logic.

Information dynamics and uniform substitution

The picture of information acquisition as the elimination of possibilities has proven fruitful in many domains, serving as a foundation for formal models in philosophy, linguistics, computer science, and economics. While the picture appears simple, its formalization in dynamic epistemic logic reveals subtleties: given a valid principle of information dynamics in the language of dynamic epistemic logic, substituting complex epistemic sentences for its atomic sentences may result in an invalid principle. In this article, we explore such failures of uniform substitution. First, we give epistemic examples inspired by Moore, Fitch, and Williamson. Second, we answer affirmatively a question posed by van Benthem: can we effectively decide when every substitution instance of a given dynamic epistemic principle is valid? In technical terms, we prove the decidability of this schematic validity problem for public announcement logic (PAL and PAL-RC) over models for finitely many fully introspective agents, as well as models for infinitely many arbitrary agents. The proof of this result illuminates the reasons for the failure of uniform substitution.

Dynamic logics of knowledge and access

A recurring issue in any formal model representing agents’ (changing) informational attitudes is how to account for the fact that the agents are limited in their access to the available inference steps, possible observations and available messages. This may be because the agents are not logically omniscient and so do not have unlimited reasoning ability. But it can also be because the agents are following a predefined protocol that explicitly limits statements available for observation and/or communication. Within the broad literature on epistemic logic, there are a variety of accounts that make precise a notion of an agent’s “limited access” (for example, Awareness Logics, Justification Logics, and Inference Logics). This paper interprets the agents’ access set of formulas as a constraint on the agents’ information gathering process limiting which formulas can be observed.