Skip to main content

Formal Semantics of Acknowledgements, Agreements and Disagreements

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Approaches to Intelligence Agents (PRIMA 1999)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 1733))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 1821 Accesses

Abstract

Acknowledgements, agreements, and disgreements are basic moves in communications among agents, since the moves form and revise shared information among the agents which is basic prerequisite of group-actions. This paper investigates formal semantics of the moves from the point of view of information sharing among agents, exploiting the circular objects assured by Hyperset Theory. Therefore, avoiding definitions of shared information by infinite conjunctions of propositions with nested epistemic modalities, the actions are all interpreted as one-step (not infinite many step) formations of shared information by corecursive definitions. As a result, we can provide a structure of inference between the actions, and define a process equivalence of dialogues with respect to their resulting shared information.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Peter Aczel. Non-well-founded Sets.CSLI, Stanford, 1987. 32, 37

    Google Scholar 

  2. Jon Barwise. Situation in Logic. CS LI, Stanford, 1989. 32, 35, 37, 39, 42, 43

    Google Scholar 

  3. J. Barwise and J. Etchemendy. The Liar.Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1987. 37, 38, 39, 40

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. J. Barwise and L. Moss. Vicious Circles. CSLI, Stanford, 1996. 32, 36, 37, 38, 39, 42

    Google Scholar 

  5. J. Barwise and J. Perry. Situations and Attitudes.The MIT Press, Cambridge, 1983. 37

    Google Scholar 

  6. H. Clark and C.R. Marshall. Definite reference and mutual knowledge. In A.K. Joshi, D. Webber, and I. Sag, editors, Elements of Discourse Understanding, pages 10–63.Cam bridge University Press, Cambridge, 1981. 33

    Google Scholar 

  7. P.R. Cohen and H.J. Levesque. Teamwork. Nôus, 25(4):487–512, 1991. 32, 38, 40

    Google Scholar 

  8. P.R. Cohen, H.J. Levesque, and I. Smith. On team formation. In Contemporary Action Theory.Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 1997. 32, 40

    Google Scholar 

  9. B. A. Davey and H.A. Priestley. Introduction to Lattices and Order.Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1990. 42

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. R. Fagin, J. Y. Halpern, Y. Moses, and V.Y. Vardi. Reasoning about Knowledge. The MIT Press, Cambridge, 1995. 35, 36, 41, 45

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. M. Greaves, H. Holmback, and J. Bladshow. What is a conversation policies? In Autonomous Agents’ 99. http://www.boeing.com/special/agents99/greaves.pdf, Seattle, 1999. 45

  12. J. Groenendijk and M. Stokhof. Question. In J. van Benthem and A. ter Meulen, editors, Handbook of Logic and Language. Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam, 1997. 41

    Google Scholar 

  13. H. Komatsu. S emantics of cooperative dialogues. In A. Ishikawa and Y. Nitta, editors, The Proceedings of the 1994 Kyoto Conference: A Festschrift for Professor Akira Ikeya, pages 183–192.Th e Logico-Linguistic Society of Japan, Tokyo, 1995. 37

    Google Scholar 

  14. H. Komatsu, N. Ogata, and A. Ishikawa. Towards a dynamic theory of beliefsharing in cooperative dialogues. In Proceedings of COLING 94, pages 1164–1169, 1994. 37

    Google Scholar 

  15. Norihiro Ogata. Information sharing models of dialogue and four classes of circularity problems. In A. Ishikawa and Y. Nitta, editors, The Proceedings of the 1994 Kyoto Conference: A Festschrift for Professor Akira Ikeya, pages 193–202. The Logico-Linguistic Society of Japan, Tokyo, 1995. 32, 40

    Google Scholar 

  16. Norihiro Ogata. Formal semantics of dialogues based on belief sharing and observational equivalence of dialogues. Journal of Natural Language Processing, 6(4):93–115, 1999. 34, 46

    Google Scholar 

  17. E.A. Schegloff, G. Jefferson, and H. Sacks. The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language, 53(2):361–382, 1977. 34

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1999 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Ogata, N. (1999). Formal Semantics of Acknowledgements, Agreements and Disagreements. In: Nakashima, H., Zhang, C. (eds) Approaches to Intelligence Agents. PRIMA 1999. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 1733. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-46693-2_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-46693-2_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-66823-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-46693-2

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy