اشترك بالحزمة الذهبية واحصل على وصول غير محدود شمرا أكاديميا
تسجيل مستخدم جديدUncertainty-Based Semantics for Multi-Agent Knowing How Logics
164
0
0.0
(
0
)
اسأل ChatGPT حول البحث
ﻻ يوجد ملخص باللغة العربية
We introduce a new semantics for a multi-agent epistemic operator of knowing how, based on an indistinguishability relation between plans. Our proposal is, arguably, closer to the standard presentation of knowing that modalities in classical epistemic logic. We study the relationship between this semantics and previous approaches, showing that our setting is general enough to capture them. We also define a sound and complete axiomatization, and investigate the computational complexity of its model checking and satisfiability problems.
قيم البحث
اقرأ أيضاً
The preferential conditional logic PCL, introduced by Burgess, and its extensions are studied. First, a natural semantics based on neighbourhood models, which generalise Lewis sphere models for counterfactual logics, is proposed. Soundness and comple
teness of PCL and its extensions with respect to this class of models are proved directly. Labelled sequent calculi for all logics of the family are then introduced. The calculi are modular and have standard proof-theoretical properties, the most important of which is admissibility of cut, that entails a syntactic proof of completeness of the calculi. By adopting a general strategy, root-first proof search terminates, thereby providing a decision procedure for PCL and its extensions. Finally, the semantic completeness of the calculi is established: from a finite branch in a failed proof attempt it is possible to extract a finite countermodel of the root sequent. The latter result gives a constructive proof of the finite model property of all the logics considered.
The early literature on epistemic logic in philosophy focused on reasoning about the knowledge or belief of a single agent, especially on controversies about introspection axioms such as the 4 and 5 axioms. By contrast, the later literature on episte
mic logic in computer science and game theory has focused on multi-agent epistemic reasoning, with the single-agent 4 and 5 axioms largely taken for granted. In the relevant multi-agent scenarios, it is often important to reason about what agent A believes about what agent B believes about what agent A believes; but it is rarely important to reason just about what agent A believes about what agent A believes. This raises the question of the extent to which single-agent introspection axioms actually matter for multi-agent epistemic reasoning. In this paper, we formalize and answer this question. To formalize the question, we first define a set of multi-agent formulas that we call agent-alternating formulas, including formulas like Box_a Box_b Box_a p but not formulas like Box_a Box_a p. We then prove, for the case of belief, that if one starts with multi-agent K or KD, then adding both the 4 and 5 axioms (or adding the B axiom) does not allow the derivation of any new agent-alternating formulas -- in this sense, introspection axioms do not matter. By contrast, we show that such conservativity results fail for knowledge and multi-agent KT, though they hold with respect to a smaller class of agent-nonrepeating formulas.
Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning (MARL) is a challenging subarea of Reinforcement Learning due to the non-stationarity of the environments and the large dimensionality of the combined action space. Deep MARL algorithms have been applied to solve di
fferent task offloading problems. However, in real-world applications, information required by the agents (i.e. rewards and states) are subject to noise and alterations. The stability and the robustness of deep MARL to practical challenges is still an open research problem. In this work, we apply state-of-the art MARL algorithms to solve task offloading with reward uncertainty. We show that perturbations in the reward signal can induce decrease in the performance compared to learning with perfect rewards. We expect this paper to stimulate more research in studying and addressing the practical challenges of deploying deep MARL solutions in wireless communications systems.
This paper is a submission to the contest: How to combine logics? at the World Congress and School on Universal Logic III, 2010. We claim that combining things, whatever these things are, is made easier if these things can be seen as the objects of a
category. We define the category of diagrammatic logics, so that categorical constructions can be used for combining diagrammatic logics. As an example, a combination of logics using an opfibration is presented, in order to study computational side-effects due to the evolution of the state during the execution of an imperative program.
We consider the optimal coverage problem where a multi-agent network is deployed in an environment with obstacles to maximize a joint event detection probability. The objective function of this problem is non-convex and no global optimum is guarantee
d by gradient-based algorithms developed to date. We first show that the objective function is monotone submodular, a class of functions for which a simple greedy algorithm is known to be within 0.63 of the optimal solution. We then derive two tighter lower bounds by exploiting the curvature information (total curvature and elemental curvature) of the objective function. We further show that the tightness of these lower bounds is complementary with respect to the sensing capabilities of the agents. The greedy algorithm solution can be subsequently used as an initial point for a gradient-based algorithm to obtain solutions even closer to the global optimum. Simulation results show that this approach leads to significantly better performance relative to previously used algorithms.
سجل دخول لتتمكن من نشر تعليقات
التعليقات
جاري جلب التعليقات
سجل دخول لتتمكن من متابعة معايير البحث التي قمت باختيارها
