In this work, we provide an extensive analysis of Hohfeld’s theory of normative relations, focusing in particular on diagrammatic structures. Our contribution is threefold. First, we specify an extensional formal language to represent the main notions in the two families of normative relations identified by Hohfeld (i.e. the deontic and the potestative family). Our primary focus is on the part of the theory concerning potestative relations. In this regard, we assign a key role to the concept of ability, which is treated as a primitive notion and used to formulate three fine-grained definitions of power (outcome-centered, change-centered and force-centered). Second, on the basis of these definitions we build Aristotelian diagrams of opposition for deontic and potestative relations, improving, extending and systematizing previous proposals formulated in the literature. Third, we present a model-theoretic interpretation and a logic programming (ASP) implementation of the proposed framework, elaborating on the procedural dimension of normative reasoning.
{"title":"A formal, diagrammatic, and operational study of normative relations","authors":"Matteo Pascucci, Giovanni Sileno","doi":"10.1093/logcom/exad011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/logcom/exad011","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 In this work, we provide an extensive analysis of Hohfeld’s theory of normative relations, focusing in particular on diagrammatic structures. Our contribution is threefold. First, we specify an extensional formal language to represent the main notions in the two families of normative relations identified by Hohfeld (i.e. the deontic and the potestative family). Our primary focus is on the part of the theory concerning potestative relations. In this regard, we assign a key role to the concept of ability, which is treated as a primitive notion and used to formulate three fine-grained definitions of power (outcome-centered, change-centered and force-centered). Second, on the basis of these definitions we build Aristotelian diagrams of opposition for deontic and potestative relations, improving, extending and systematizing previous proposals formulated in the literature. Third, we present a model-theoretic interpretation and a logic programming (ASP) implementation of the proposed framework, elaborating on the procedural dimension of normative reasoning.","PeriodicalId":398763,"journal":{"name":"J. Log. Comput.","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131507441","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Runtime verification is a lightweight formal verification technique used to verify the runtime behaviour of software (resp. hardware) systems. Given a formal property, one or more monitors are synthesized to verify the latter against a system execution. A monitor can only conclude the violation of a property when it observes such a violation. Unfortunately, in safety-critical scenarios, this might happen too late for the system to react properly. In such scenarios, it is advised to use predictive runtime verification, where monitors are capable of anticipating (by using a model of the system) future events before actually observing them. In this work, instead of assuming such a model is given, we describe a runtime verification workflow where the model is learnt and incrementally refined by using process mining techniques. We present the approach and the resulting prototype tool.
{"title":"Incrementally Predictive Runtime Verification","authors":"Angelo Ferrando, G. Delzanno","doi":"10.1093/logcom/exad012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/logcom/exad012","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Runtime verification is a lightweight formal verification technique used to verify the runtime behaviour of software (resp. hardware) systems. Given a formal property, one or more monitors are synthesized to verify the latter against a system execution. A monitor can only conclude the violation of a property when it observes such a violation. Unfortunately, in safety-critical scenarios, this might happen too late for the system to react properly. In such scenarios, it is advised to use predictive runtime verification, where monitors are capable of anticipating (by using a model of the system) future events before actually observing them. In this work, instead of assuming such a model is given, we describe a runtime verification workflow where the model is learnt and incrementally refined by using process mining techniques. We present the approach and the resulting prototype tool.","PeriodicalId":398763,"journal":{"name":"J. Log. Comput.","volume":"28 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"117319805","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The sustainable management of smart environments enabled by the Internet of Things (IoT) requires new methodologies and tools to suitably handle potentially many users and their objectives on cyber-physical systems, e.g. smart lighting, smart A/C. In this article, we propose a declarative framework to model IoT-enabled smart environments. Our methodology permits (i) expressing user roles and hierarchical environments, (ii) declaring customized policies to mediate user objectives into a target state and (iii) determining valid settings for IoT actuators to achieve such a target also reducing energy consumption. An open-source Prolog prototype of the framework is showcased over two lifelike motivating examples and its scalability is assessed at increasing sizes of the managed smart environment.
{"title":"Sustainable goal-oriented smart environments: a declarative programming approach","authors":"Giuseppe Bisicchia, Stefano Forti, Antonio Brogi","doi":"10.1093/logcom/exad015","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/logcom/exad015","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 The sustainable management of smart environments enabled by the Internet of Things (IoT) requires new methodologies and tools to suitably handle potentially many users and their objectives on cyber-physical systems, e.g. smart lighting, smart A/C. In this article, we propose a declarative framework to model IoT-enabled smart environments. Our methodology permits (i) expressing user roles and hierarchical environments, (ii) declaring customized policies to mediate user objectives into a target state and (iii) determining valid settings for IoT actuators to achieve such a target also reducing energy consumption. An open-source Prolog prototype of the framework is showcased over two lifelike motivating examples and its scalability is assessed at increasing sizes of the managed smart environment.","PeriodicalId":398763,"journal":{"name":"J. Log. Comput.","volume":"92 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133647096","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Special issue for the 36th Italian Conference on Computational Logic (CILC 2021)","authors":"F. Bergenti, Stefania Monica","doi":"10.1093/logcom/exad008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/logcom/exad008","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":398763,"journal":{"name":"J. Log. Comput.","volume":"227 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116373267","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-20DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-89391-0_14
M. Lagasquie-Schiex
{"title":"Handling Support Cycles and Collective Interactions in the Logical Encoding of Higher-Order Bipolar Argumentation Frameworks","authors":"M. Lagasquie-Schiex","doi":"10.1007/978-3-030-89391-0_14","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-89391-0_14","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":398763,"journal":{"name":"J. Log. Comput.","volume":"34 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123168988","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
P. Faliszewski, Rica Gonen, Martin Koutecký, Nimrod Talmon
{"title":"Correction to: Opinion diffusion and campaigning on society graphs","authors":"P. Faliszewski, Rica Gonen, Martin Koutecký, Nimrod Talmon","doi":"10.1093/logcom/exac103","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/logcom/exac103","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":398763,"journal":{"name":"J. Log. Comput.","volume":"42 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122958117","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Artemov, building upon a tradition beginning with Kolmogorov and Gödel, developed a paradigm for understanding Constructive Reasoning in terms of classical proofs. Kolmogorov–Gödel–Artemov constructivism flies in the face of the usual understanding of Constructive Reasoning as being distinguished from Classical Reasoning in terms of its theory of truth. Is there something that stands to traditional Classical Reasoning as Kolmogorov–Gödel–Artemov constructivism stands to Constructive Reasoning? In this paper, we develop an affirmative answer to this question by presenting a justification account of Classical Reasoning in terms of explicit justification. The traditional truth paradigm account of Classical Reasoning leads to the well-known paradoxes of material implication. We show that the justification account of Classical Reasoning avoids this problem.1
{"title":"Classical reasoning in the justification paradigm","authors":"V. A. Peluce","doi":"10.1093/logcom/exac076","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/logcom/exac076","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Artemov, building upon a tradition beginning with Kolmogorov and Gödel, developed a paradigm for understanding Constructive Reasoning in terms of classical proofs. Kolmogorov–Gödel–Artemov constructivism flies in the face of the usual understanding of Constructive Reasoning as being distinguished from Classical Reasoning in terms of its theory of truth. Is there something that stands to traditional Classical Reasoning as Kolmogorov–Gödel–Artemov constructivism stands to Constructive Reasoning? In this paper, we develop an affirmative answer to this question by presenting a justification account of Classical Reasoning in terms of explicit justification. The traditional truth paradigm account of Classical Reasoning leads to the well-known paradoxes of material implication. We show that the justification account of Classical Reasoning avoids this problem.1","PeriodicalId":398763,"journal":{"name":"J. Log. Comput.","volume":"27 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-11-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127223617","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Correction to: An Argumentation-Based Approach for Goal Reasoning and Explanations Generation","authors":"","doi":"10.1093/logcom/exac083","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/logcom/exac083","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":398763,"journal":{"name":"J. Log. Comput.","volume":"27 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"117244356","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Mariela Morveli Espinoza, J. Nieves, Cesar Augusto Tacla, Henrique M. R. Jasinski
Explainable Artificial Intelligence systems, including intelligent agents, are expected to explain their internal decisions, behaviors and reasoning that produce their choices to the humans (or to other systems) with which they interact. Given this context, the aim of this article is to introduce a practical reasoning agent framework that supports generation of explanations about the goals the agent committed to. Firstly, we present an argumentation-based formalization for supporting goal reasoning. This is based on the belief-based goal processing model proposed by Castelfranchi and Paglieri, which is a more granular and refined model than the Beliefs–Desires–Intentions model. We focus on the dynamics of goals since they are desires until they become intentions, including the conditions under which a goal can be cancelled. We use formal argumentation reasoning to support the passage of the goals from their initial state until their final state. Secondly, in order that agents based on the proposed formalization be able to generate explanations about the goals they decided to commit to, we endow them with a mechanism for generating both complete and partial explanations. Finally, we use a scenario of rescue robots in order to illustrate the performance of our proposal, for which a simulator was developed to support the agents goal reasoning.
{"title":"An Argumentation-Based Approach for Goal Reasoning and Explanations Generation","authors":"Mariela Morveli Espinoza, J. Nieves, Cesar Augusto Tacla, Henrique M. R. Jasinski","doi":"10.1093/logcom/exac052","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/logcom/exac052","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Explainable Artificial Intelligence systems, including intelligent agents, are expected to explain their internal decisions, behaviors and reasoning that produce their choices to the humans (or to other systems) with which they interact. Given this context, the aim of this article is to introduce a practical reasoning agent framework that supports generation of explanations about the goals the agent committed to. Firstly, we present an argumentation-based formalization for supporting goal reasoning. This is based on the belief-based goal processing model proposed by Castelfranchi and Paglieri, which is a more granular and refined model than the Beliefs–Desires–Intentions model. We focus on the dynamics of goals since they are desires until they become intentions, including the conditions under which a goal can be cancelled. We use formal argumentation reasoning to support the passage of the goals from their initial state until their final state. Secondly, in order that agents based on the proposed formalization be able to generate explanations about the goals they decided to commit to, we endow them with a mechanism for generating both complete and partial explanations. Finally, we use a scenario of rescue robots in order to illustrate the performance of our proposal, for which a simulator was developed to support the agents goal reasoning.","PeriodicalId":398763,"journal":{"name":"J. Log. Comput.","volume":"71 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130061957","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper shows how safety and liveness properties are not necessarily preserved by different kinds of copies of computational artefacts and proposes procedures to preserve them, which are consistent with ethical analyses on software property rights infringement. Safety and liveness are second-order properties that are crucial in the definition of the formal ontology of computational artefacts. Software copies are analysed at the level of their formal models as exact, inexact and approximate copies, according to the taxonomy in [3]. First, it is explained how exact copies are the only kind of copies that preserve safety and liveness properties, and how inexact and approximate copies do not necessarily preserve them. Secondly, two model checking algorithms are proposed to verify whether inexact and approximate copies actually preserve safety and liveness properties. Essential properties of termination, correctness and complexity are proved for these algorithms. Finally, contraction and expansion algorithmic operations are defined, allowing for the automatic design of safety- and liveness-preserving approximate copies. As a conclusion, the relevance of the present logical analysis for the ongoing debates in miscomputation and computer ethics is highlighted.
{"title":"Copying safety and liveness properties of computational artefacts","authors":"Nicola Angius, G. Primiero","doi":"10.1093/logcom/exac053","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/logcom/exac053","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This paper shows how safety and liveness properties are not necessarily preserved by different kinds of copies of computational artefacts and proposes procedures to preserve them, which are consistent with ethical analyses on software property rights infringement. Safety and liveness are second-order properties that are crucial in the definition of the formal ontology of computational artefacts. Software copies are analysed at the level of their formal models as exact, inexact and approximate copies, according to the taxonomy in [3]. First, it is explained how exact copies are the only kind of copies that preserve safety and liveness properties, and how inexact and approximate copies do not necessarily preserve them. Secondly, two model checking algorithms are proposed to verify whether inexact and approximate copies actually preserve safety and liveness properties. Essential properties of termination, correctness and complexity are proved for these algorithms. Finally, contraction and expansion algorithmic operations are defined, allowing for the automatic design of safety- and liveness-preserving approximate copies. As a conclusion, the relevance of the present logical analysis for the ongoing debates in miscomputation and computer ethics is highlighted.","PeriodicalId":398763,"journal":{"name":"J. Log. Comput.","volume":"26 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130205672","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：