Avoiding Deontic Explosion by Contextually Restricting Aggregation

Meheus, Joke; Beirlaen, Mathieu; Putte, Frederik Van De

doi:10.1007/978-3-642-14183-6_12

Cited by 17 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Ω + • ) and then according to the abnormalities in Ω wper . 33 Permissive norms. In some applications it is useful to have permissive norms as part of the conditional norms in the premise set.…”

Section: Permissions By Defaultmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adaptive Logic Characterizations of Input/Output Logic

2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.We translate unconstrained and constrained input/output logics as introduced by Makinson and van der Torre to modal logics, using adaptive logics for the constrained case. The resulting reformulation has some additional benefits. First, we obtain a prooftheoretic (dynamic) characterization of input/output logics. Second, we demonstrate that our framework naturally gives rise to useful variants and allows to express important notions that go beyond the expressive means of input/output logics, such as violations and sanctions.

show abstract

Section: Permissions By Defaultmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adaptive Logic Characterizations of Input/Output Logic

2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There too, SDL gives rise to explosion in view of formulas of the form OA ∧ O¬A, OA ∧ P¬A, etc. And there too, authors have suggested weakening the logic in order to tolerate normative conflicts; for some examples, see [12,21,25,28,31,32]. A good oversight can be found in [13].…”

Section: Normative Conflictsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Paraconsistent Multi-agent Framework for Dealing with Normative Conflicts

Beirlaen

Straßer

2011

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. In a multi-agent deontic setting, normative conflicts can take a variety of different logical forms. In this paper, we present a very general characterization of such conflicts, including both intra-and inter-agent normative conflicts, conflicts between groups of agents, conflicts between obligations and permissions, and conflicts between contradictory norms. In order to account for the consistent possibility of this wide variety of conflict-types, we present a paraconsistent deontic logic, i.e. a logic that invalidates the classical principle of non-contradiction. Next, we strengthen this logic within the adaptive logics framework for defeasible reasoning. The resulting inconsistency-adaptive deontic logic interprets a given set of norms 'as consistently as possible'.

show abstract

“…In a non-monotonic, non-agentive setting, this strategy was adopted in e.g. [18,21,23,29,30]. Another strategy open for accommodating normative conflicts is to weaken the inheritance principle (INHO).…”

Section: Conflict-tolerant Deontic Logicmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For some other adaptive deontic logics that can consistently accommodate instances of normative conflicts, see [7,29,39,41]. For an introduction to the framework of adaptive logics, see [3].…”

Section: Adaptive Deontic Logicmentioning

confidence: 99%