Titlebook: Deontic Logic in Computer Science; 10th International C Guido Governatori,Giovanni Sartor Conference proceedings 2010 Springer-Verlag Berli

遗产

高歌

Deontic Redundancy: A Fundamental Challenge for Deontic Logic, discuss those benchmark examples in four formal approaches to deontic reasoning: traditional model logic, dynamic approaches, violation oriented or diagnostic systems, and imperativist or norm based approaches.

Melanocytes

A Dyadic Operator for the Gradation of Desirability,ore intuitive and concrete than the SDL deontic accessibility relation. We also show that the core modality of the logic permits to represent the Chisholm and Forrester paradoxes of deontic logic in a more precise way, which does not lead to inconsistencies.

Madrigal

Axioms for Obligation and Robustness with Temporal Logic,l this formal system ., and give a completeness proof. We also consider the fragments of the language containing only path quantifiers (but where variables are dependent on histories). We examine semantic properties and potential axiomatisations for these fragments.

完全

Foment

Relevance, Derogation and Permission,t/output logic (derogations), and AGM-style contractions on sets of formulae, and use it as a bridge to migrate results on propositional relevance from the latter to the former idiom. Changing the concept accordingly we show that positive permission now incorporates a relevance requirement that wards off triviality.

跟随

Retroactive Legal Changes and Revision Theory in Defeasible Logic,stem evolves over time. In this paper, we adjust our view and show that, under some restrictions, ideas from base revision, if applied to Defeasible Logic or to similar rule-based systems, can indeed capture some significant aspects of annulments, abrogations, and derogations.

mucous-membrane

Avoiding Deontic Explosion by Contextually Restricting Aggregation,eads to a richer consequence set than ..... The logic .. avoids Goble’s criticisms against other non-adjunctive systems of deontic logic. Moreover, it can handle all the ‘toy examples’ from the literature as well as more complex ones.

reception

Obligations and Prohibitions in Talmudic Deontic Logic,gard {.., ..} and {.., ..} as two sets of operators , where .. and .. are independent of one another and where we have some connections between the two sets..We shall list the types of obligation patterns appearing in the Talmud and compare Talmudic Logic with modern deontic logic.

PUT