2002
DOI: 10.1016/s0004-3702(02)00196-0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Clausal resolution in a logic of rational agency

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
20
0
4

Year Published

2004
2004
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1

Relationship

3
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(24 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
0
20
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…current disposition and set of perceptual inputs, and for a given simulator fidelity and internal timing, a robot will always generate the same set of IM and CE outputs. Thus we may be able to formally check the correctness of the deterministic Generate-and-Test process using agent model checking (Dennis et al, 2012) or deductive verification approaches (Dixon et al, 2002). …”
Section: Validation and Verificationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…current disposition and set of perceptual inputs, and for a given simulator fidelity and internal timing, a robot will always generate the same set of IM and CE outputs. Thus we may be able to formally check the correctness of the deterministic Generate-and-Test process using agent model checking (Dennis et al, 2012) or deductive verification approaches (Dixon et al, 2002). …”
Section: Validation and Verificationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In contrast, to show completeness of our calculus R ,S CTL we construct a graph known as a labelled behaviour graph. This is an extension of the concept of a behaviour graph used in Fisher et al [2001] for proving completeness of a clausal resolution for PLTL and related to the concept of a labelled behaviour graph used [Dixon et al 2002]. However, our labelled behaviour graph differs in its construction to capture the semantics of indices in SNF g CTL .…”
Section: Comparison Between R S Ctl and The Previous Resolution Calcmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While individual modal, temporal, or description logics have been studied extensively in the past, much less is known about combinations of modal logics and, in particular, about practical proof methods for such combinations [22]. However, both resolution-and tableau-based proof methods for combinations of propositional (linear or branching time) temporal logics with modal logics [54,53,193,94] have been studied. For example, the combination of modal and temporal logics and translations into fragments of classical first-order logics have been used to reason about the KARO agent framework [96], and about extensions of the basic METATEM framework [71].…”
Section: • Temporal Logicsmentioning
confidence: 99%