Action models in inquisitive logic. van Gessel, T. Synthese, 2020. ![Action models in inquisitive logic [link]](https://bibbase.org/img/filetypes/link.svg "link")
Paper doi abstract bibtex Information exchange can be viewed as a process of asking questions and answering them. While dynamic epistemic logic traditionally focuses on statements, recent developments have been concerned with ways of incorporating questions. One approach, based on the framework of inquisitive semantics, is inquisitive dynamic epistemic logic (𝖨𝖣𝖤𝖫). In this system, agents are represented with issues as well as information. On the dynamic level, it can model actions that raise new issues. Compared to other approaches, a limitation of 𝖨𝖣𝖤𝖫 is that it can only encode public announcements. 𝖨𝖣𝖤𝖫 can be refined to encode private questions, by merging its static basis, inquisitive epistemic logic (𝖨𝖤𝖫), with action model logic (𝖠𝖬𝖫). This can be done in two ways, namely by enriching action models with questions as possible actions or with issues concerning which action takes place. This paper describes the corresponding dynamic logics, which are conservative extensions of both 𝖠𝖬𝖫 and 𝖨𝖤𝖫, and a sound and complete axiomatization is given for both.
@article{Gessel:18,
abstract = {Information exchange can be viewed as a process of asking questions and answering them. While dynamic epistemic logic traditionally focuses on statements, recent developments have been concerned with ways of incorporating questions. One approach, based on the framework of inquisitive semantics, is inquisitive dynamic epistemic logic (𝖨𝖣𝖤𝖫). In this system, agents are represented with issues as well as information. On the dynamic level, it can model actions that raise new issues. Compared to other approaches, a limitation of 𝖨𝖣𝖤𝖫 is that it can only encode public announcements. 𝖨𝖣𝖤𝖫 can be refined to encode private questions, by merging its static basis, inquisitive epistemic logic (𝖨𝖤𝖫), with action model logic (𝖠𝖬𝖫). This can be done in two ways, namely by enriching action models with questions as possible actions or with issues concerning which action takes place. This paper describes the corresponding dynamic logics, which are conservative extensions of both 𝖠𝖬𝖫 and 𝖨𝖤𝖫, and a sound and complete axiomatization is given for both.},
author = {van Gessel, Thom},
date-added = {2021-08-17 00:00:00 +0000},
date-modified = {2021-08-17 00:00:00 +0000},
doi = {10.1007/s11229-018-1886-5},
issn = {1573-0964},
journal = {Synthese},
keywords = {inquisitive logic},
pages = {3905--3945},
title = {Action models in inquisitive logic},
url = {https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11229-018-1886-5},
year = {2020},
Bdsk-Url-1 = {https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11229-018-1886-5},
Bdsk-Url-2 = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-018-1886-5}}
Downloads: 0
{"_id":"3jHo8YBoAhFv8oxNB","bibbaseid":"vangessel-actionmodelsininquisitivelogic-2020","author_short":["van Gessel, T."],"bibdata":{"bibtype":"article","type":"article","abstract":"Information exchange can be viewed as a process of asking questions and answering them. While dynamic epistemic logic traditionally focuses on statements, recent developments have been concerned with ways of incorporating questions. One approach, based on the framework of inquisitive semantics, is inquisitive dynamic epistemic logic (𝖨𝖣𝖤𝖫). In this system, agents are represented with issues as well as information. On the dynamic level, it can model actions that raise new issues. Compared to other approaches, a limitation of 𝖨𝖣𝖤𝖫 is that it can only encode public announcements. 𝖨𝖣𝖤𝖫 can be refined to encode private questions, by merging its static basis, inquisitive epistemic logic (𝖨𝖤𝖫), with action model logic (𝖠𝖬𝖫). This can be done in two ways, namely by enriching action models with questions as possible actions or with issues concerning which action takes place. This paper describes the corresponding dynamic logics, which are conservative extensions of both 𝖠𝖬𝖫 and 𝖨𝖤𝖫, and a sound and complete axiomatization is given for both.","author":[{"propositions":["van"],"lastnames":["Gessel"],"firstnames":["Thom"],"suffixes":[]}],"date-added":"2021-08-17 00:00:00 +0000","date-modified":"2021-08-17 00:00:00 +0000","doi":"10.1007/s11229-018-1886-5","issn":"1573-0964","journal":"Synthese","keywords":"inquisitive logic","pages":"3905–3945","title":"Action models in inquisitive logic","url":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11229-018-1886-5","year":"2020","bdsk-url-1":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11229-018-1886-5","bdsk-url-2":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-018-1886-5","bibtex":"@article{Gessel:18,\n\tabstract = {Information exchange can be viewed as a process of asking questions and answering them. While dynamic epistemic logic traditionally focuses on statements, recent developments have been concerned with ways of incorporating questions. One approach, based on the framework of inquisitive semantics, is inquisitive dynamic epistemic logic (𝖨𝖣𝖤𝖫). In this system, agents are represented with issues as well as information. On the dynamic level, it can model actions that raise new issues. Compared to other approaches, a limitation of 𝖨𝖣𝖤𝖫 is that it can only encode public announcements. 𝖨𝖣𝖤𝖫 can be refined to encode private questions, by merging its static basis, inquisitive epistemic logic (𝖨𝖤𝖫), with action model logic (𝖠𝖬𝖫). This can be done in two ways, namely by enriching action models with questions as possible actions or with issues concerning which action takes place. This paper describes the corresponding dynamic logics, which are conservative extensions of both 𝖠𝖬𝖫 and 𝖨𝖤𝖫, and a sound and complete axiomatization is given for both.},\n\tauthor = {van Gessel, Thom},\n\tdate-added = {2021-08-17 00:00:00 +0000},\n\tdate-modified = {2021-08-17 00:00:00 +0000},\n\tdoi = {10.1007/s11229-018-1886-5},\n\tissn = {1573-0964},\n\tjournal = {Synthese},\n\tkeywords = {inquisitive logic},\n\tpages = {3905--3945},\n\ttitle = {Action models in inquisitive logic},\n\turl = {https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11229-018-1886-5},\n\tyear = {2020},\n\tBdsk-Url-1 = {https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11229-018-1886-5},\n\tBdsk-Url-2 = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-018-1886-5}}\n\n","author_short":["van Gessel, T."],"key":"Gessel:18","id":"Gessel:18","bibbaseid":"vangessel-actionmodelsininquisitivelogic-2020","role":"author","urls":{"Paper":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11229-018-1886-5"},"keyword":["inquisitive logic"],"metadata":{"authorlinks":{}}},"bibtype":"article","biburl":"https://projects.illc.uva.nl/inquisitivesemantics/assets/files/papers.bib","dataSources":["x2Aox4ZP7RsyuDjWX","LaLDs2mrYhQpgH6Lk"],"keywords":["inquisitive logic"],"search_terms":["action","models","inquisitive","logic","van gessel"],"title":"Action models in inquisitive logic","year":2020,"downloads":1}