Resolving conflicts between beliefs, obligations, intentions, and desires

Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence (Subseries of Lecture Notes in Computer Science)

Volumn 2143, Issue , 2001, Pages 568-579

  Broersen, Jan ^a   Dastani, Mehdi ^a   Van Der Torre, Leendert ^a  

^a VU UNIVERSITY AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; COMPUTERS;

CONFLICT RESOLUTION; DEFAULT LOGIC; LOGICAL ANALYSIS;

FORMAL LOGIC;

EID: 84904600167     PISSN: 03029743     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1007/3-540-44652-4_50     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (21)

1. C. Boutilier. Toward a logic for qualitative decision theory. In Proceedings of the KR'94, pages 75-86, 1994.
2. Michael E. Bratman. Intention, plans, and practical reason. Harvard University Press, Cambridge Mass, 1987.
3. G. Brewka and T. Eiter. Preferred answer sets for extended logic programs. Artificial Intelligence, 109:297-356, 1999.
4. J. Broersen, M. Dastani, Z. Huang, J. Hulstijn, and L. van der Torre. The BOID architecture: Conflicts between beliefs, obligations, intentions, and desires. In Proceedings of International Conference on Autonomous Agents (AA'01), 2001.
5. P.R. Cohen and H.J. Levesque. Intention is choice with commitment. Artificial Intelligence, 42:213-261, 1990.
6. F. Dignum. Autonomous agents and norms. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 7:69- 79, 1999.
7. F. Dignum, D. Morley, E.A. Sonenberg, and L. Cavedon. Towards socially sophisticated BDI agents. In Proceedings of the ICMAS 2000, pages 111-118, 2000.
8. Thomas Eiter, V.S. Subrahmanian, and George Pick. Heterogeneous active agents I: Semantics. Artificial Intelligence, 108 (1-2):179-255, 1999.
9. D. Makinson. On a fundamental problem of deontic logic. In Norms, logics and information systems, pages 29-53. IOS Press, 1999.
10. D. Makinson and L. van der Torre. Input-output logics. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 29:383-408, 2000.
11. D. Makinson and L. van der Torre. Constraints for input-output logics. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 30(2):155-185, 2001.
12. V.W. Marek and M. Truszczynski. Nonmonotonic logic: Context-dependent reasoning. Springer, Berlin, 1993.
13. J. Pearl. From conditional oughts to qualitative decision theory. In Proceedings of the UAI'93, pages 12-20, 1993.
14. A. Rao and M. George. BDI agents: From theory to practice. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Multi-Agent Systems (ICMAS'95), pages 312-319, 1995.
15. R. Reiter. A logic for default reasoning. Artificial Intelligence, 13:81-132, 1980.
16. R. Reiter. A theory of diagnosis from first principles. Artificial Intelligence, 32:57- 95, 1987.
17. K. Schild. On the relationship between BDI logics and standard logics of concurrency. Autonomous Agents and Multi Agent systems, 2000.
18. R. Thomason. Desires and defaults: A framework for planning with inferred goals. In Proceedings of the KR'2000, pages 702-713. Morgan Kaufmann, 2000.
19. L. van der Torre and Y. Tan. Contrary-to-duty reasoning with preference-based dyadic obligations. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, 27:49-78, 1999.
20. L. van der Torre and Y. Tan. Diagnosis and decision making in normative reasoning. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 7:51-67, 1999.
21. G.H. von Wright. Norms, truth and logic. Practical Reason. Blackwell, Oxford, 1983.