% This file was created with JabRef 2.10. % Encoding: UTF8 @inproceedings{DBLP:conf/jurix/HumphreysSCBTR15, author = {Llio Humphreys and Cristiana Santos and Luigi Di Caro and Guido Boella and Leon van der Torre and Livio Robaldo}, title = {Mapping Recitals to Normative Provisions in {EU} Legislation to Assist Legal Interpretation}, booktitle = {Legal Knowledge and Information Systems - {JURIX} 2015: The Twenty-Eighth Annual Conference, Braga, Portual, December 10-11, 2015}, pages = {41--49}, year = {2015}, crossref = {DBLP:conf/jurix/2015}, url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-609-5-41}, doi = {10.3233/978-1-61499-609-5-41}, timestamp = {Mon, 23 Nov 2015 18:58:41 +0100}, biburl = {http://dblp.uni-trier.de/rec/bib/conf/jurix/HumphreysSCBTR15}, bibsource = {dblp computer science bibliography, http://dblp.org}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/jurix2015.pdf} } @proceedings{DBLP:conf/jurix/2015, title = {Legal Knowledge and Information Systems - {JURIX} 2015: The Twenty-Eighth Annual Conference, Braga, Portual, December 10-11, 2015}, series = {Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications}, volume = {279}, publisher = {{IOS} Press}, year = {2015}, isbn = {978-1-61499-608-8}, timestamp = {Mon, 23 Nov 2015 18:50:51 +0100}, biburl = {http://dblp.uni-trier.de/rec/bib/conf/jurix/2015}, bibsource = {dblp computer science bibliography, http://dblp.org} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/ecsi/AhmedGTV14, Title = {Social Interaction Based Audience Segregation for Online Social Networks}, Author = {Javed Ahmed and Guido Governatori and Leendert W. N. van der Torre and Serena Villata}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the European Conference on Social Intelligence (ECSI-2014), Barcelona, Spain, November 3-5, 2014.}, Year = {2014}, Pages = {186--197}, Bibsource = {dblp computer science bibliography, http://dblp.org}, Biburl = {http://dblp.uni-trier.de/rec/bib/conf/ecsi/AhmedGTV14}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/ecsi/2014}, Timestamp = {Tue, 07 Apr 2015 21:05:14 +0200}, Url = {http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1283/paper_25.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/dbsec/AucherBBGT11, Title = {Dynamics in Delegation and Revocation Schemes: A Logical Approach}, Author = {Guillaume Aucher and Steve Barker and Guido Boella and Valerio Genovese and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {DBSec}, Year = {2011}, Pages = {90-105}, Abstract = {In this paper we first introduce a logic for describing formally a family of delegation and revocation models that are based on the work in Hagström et al.. We then extend our logic to accommodate an epistemic interpretation of trust within the framework that we define. What emerges from this work is a rich framework of formally well-defined delegation and revocation schemes that accommodates an important trust component. }, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/dbsec/2011}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22348-8_9}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22348-8_9} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/deon/AucherBT10, Title = {Privacy Policies with Modal Logic: The Dynamic Turn}, Author = {Guillaume Aucher and Guido Boella and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {DEON}, Year = {2010}, Pages = {196-213}, Abstract = {Privacy policies are often defined in terms of permitted messages. Instead, in this paper we derive dynamically the permitted messages from static privacy policies defined in terms of permitted and obligatory knowledge. With this new approach, we do not have to specify the permissions and prohibitions of all message combinations explicitly. To specify and reason about such privacy policies, we extend a multi-modal logic introduced by Cuppens and Demolombe with update operators modeling the dynamics of both knowledge and privacy policies. We show also how to determine the obligatory messages, how to express epistemic norms, and how to check whether a situation is compliant with respect to a privacy policy. We axiomatize and prove the decidability of our logic.}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/deon/2010}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-14183-6_15}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-14183-6_15} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/jurix/AucherBT09, Title = {Prescriptive and Descriptive Obligations in Dynamic Epistemic Deontic Logic}, Author = {Guillaume Aucher and Guido Boella and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {AICOL Workshops}, Year = {2009}, Pages = {150-161}, Abstract = {Normative sentences can be used to change or to describe the normative system, known as prescriptive and descriptive obligations respectively. In applications of deontic logic it is important to distinguish these two uses of normative sentences. In this paper we show how they can be distinguished and analysed in a dynamic epistemic deontic logic.}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/jurix/2009aicol}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-16524-5_10}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-16524-5_10} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/woa/BaldoniBT06, Title = {Importing Agent-like Interaction in Object Orientation}, Author = {Matteo Baldoni and Guido Boella and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {WOA}, Year = {2006}, Abstract = {This paper begins with the comparison of the message-sending mechanism, for communication among agents, and the method-invocation mechanism, for communication among objects. Then, we describe an extension of the methodinvocation mechanism by introducing the notion of ``sender'' of a message, ``state'' of the interaction and ``protocol'' using the notion of ``role'', as it has been introduced in the powerJava extension of Java. The use of roles in communication is shown by means of an example of protocol.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/woa06.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/woa/2006}, Ee = {http://sunsite.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/Publications/CEUR-WS/Vol-204/P12.pdf}, Slides = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/woa06.ppt}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/woa06.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/promas/BaldoniBT05, Title = {Bridging Agent Theory and Object Orientation: Importing Social Roles in Object Oriented Languages}, Author = {Matteo Baldoni and Guido Boella and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {PROMAS}, Year = {2005}, Pages = {57-75}, Abstract = {Social roles structure social institutions like organizations in Multi- Agent Systems (MAS). In this paper we describe how to introduce the notion of social role in programming languages. To avoid the commitment to a particular agent model, architecture or language, we decided to extend Java, the most prominent object oriented programming language, by adding social roles. The obtained language allows an easier implementation of MAS's w.r.t. the Java language. We also show that many important properties of social roles, studied in the MAS field, can be applied to objects. Two are the essential features of social roles according to an analysis reported in the paper: social roles are defined by other entities (called institutions), and when an agent plays a role it is endowed with powers by the institution that defines it. We interpret these two features into the object oriented paradigm as the fact that social roles are objects, which are defined in and exist only inside other objects (corresponding to institutions), and that, through a role, external objects playing the role can access to the object (institution) the role belongs to. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/promas05.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/promas/2005}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/11678823_4}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/promas05.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/woa/BaldoniBT05, Title = {Social roles, from agents back to objects}, Author = {Matteo Baldoni and Guido Boella and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {WOA}, Year = {2005}, Pages = {164-170}, Abstract = {In this paper we introduce a new view on roles in Object Oriented programming languages. This view is based on an ontological analysis of roles and attributes to roles the following properties: first, a role is always associated not only with an object instance playing the role, but also to another object instance which constitutes the context of the role and which we call institution. Second, the definition of a role depends on the definition of the institution which constitutes its context. Third, this second property allows to endow players of roles with powers to modify the state of the institution and of the other roles of the same institution. As an example of this model of roles in Object Oriented programming languages, we introduce a role construct in Java. We interpret these three features of roles in Java as the fact that, first, roles are implemented as classes which can be instantiated only in presence of an instance of the player of the role and of an instance of the class representing the institution. Second, the definition of a class implementing a role is included in the class definition of the institution the role belongs to. Thirdly, powers are methods of roles which can access private fields and methods of the institution they belong to and of the other roles of the same institution. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/woa05.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/woa/2005}, Ee = {http://lia.deis.unibo.it/books/woa2005/papers/23.pdf}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/woa05.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/comma/BaroniBCGTV12, Title = {On Input/Output Argumentation Frameworks}, Author = {Pietro Baroni and Guido Boella and Federico Cerutti and Massimiliano Giacomin and Leendert W. N. van der Torre and Serena Villata}, Booktitle = {COMMA}, Year = {2012}, Pages = {358-365}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/comma/2012}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-111-3-358}, Url = {http://www.booksonline.iospress.nl/Content/View.aspx?piid=32209} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/argnlp/BaroniGLT14, Title = {Encompassing Uncertainty in Argumentation Schemes}, Author = {Pietro Baroni and Massimiliano Giacomin and Beishui Liao and Leon van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the Workshop on Frontiers and Connections between Argumentation Theory and Natural Language Processing, Forl{\`{\i}}-Cesena, Italy, July 21-25, 2014.}, Year = {2014}, Bibsource = {dblp computer science bibliography, http://dblp.org}, Biburl = {http://dblp.uni-trier.de/rec/bib/conf/argnlp/BaroniGLT14}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/argnlp/2014}, Timestamp = {Wed, 15 Apr 2015 21:31:58 +0200}, Url = {http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1341/paper10.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/ecai/BoellaGGT10, Title = {Higher-Order Coalition Logic}, Author = {Guido Boella and Dov M. Gabbay and Valerio Genovese and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {ECAI}, Year = {2010}, Pages = {555-560}, Abstract = {We introduce and study higher-order coalition logic, a multi modal monadic second-order logic with operators [{x}ψ]φ ex- pressing that the coalition of all agents satisfying ψ(x) can achieve a state in which φ holds. We use neighborhood semantics to model ex- tensive games of perfect information with simultaneous actions and we provide a framework reasoning about agents in the same way as it is reasoning about their abilities. We illustrate higher-order coalition logic to represent and reason about coalition formation and cooper- ation, we show a more general and expressive way to quantify over coalitions than quantified coalition logic, we give an axiomatization and prove completeness.}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/ecai/2010}, Date-modified = {2011-09-25 17:53:28 +0200}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/978-1-60750-606-5-555}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/978-1-60750-606-5-555} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/kesamsta/BoellaGPTV11, Title = {Argumentative Agents Negotiating on Potential Attacks}, Author = {Guido Boella and Dov M. Gabbay and Alan Perotti and Leendert van der Torre and Serena Villata}, Booktitle = {KES-AMSTA}, Year = {2011}, Pages = {280-290}, Abstract = {When arguing, agents may want to discuss about the details after agreeing about the general problems. We propose to model this kind of situation using an extended argumentation framework with potential attacks. Agents negotiation about raising potential attacks or not, in order to maximize the number of their accepted arguments. The result of the negotiation process consists in the formation of coalitions composed by those agents which have found an agreement. The two proposed negotiation protocols have been implemented and an evaluation, addressed by means of experimental results, shows which combination of strategies and negotiation protocol allows the agents to optimize outcomes.}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/kesamsta/2011}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22000-5_30}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22000-5_30} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/tafa/BoellaGPTV11, Title = {Conditional Labelling for Abstract Argumentation}, Author = {Guido Boella and Dov M. Gabbay and Alan Perotti and Leendert van der Torre and Serena Villata}, Booktitle = {TAFA}, Year = {2011}, Pages = {232-248}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/tafa/2011}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29184-5_15}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/tafa11.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/kr/BoellaGRT10, Title = {A Logical Understanding of Legal Interpretation}, Author = {Guido Boella and Guido Governatori and Antonino Rotolo and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {KR}, Year = {2010}, Abstract = {If compliance with a norm does not achieve its purpose, then its applicability must dynamically be restricted or expanded. Legal interpretation is a mechanism from law allowing norms to be adapted to unforeseen situations. We model this mechanism for norms regulating computer systems by representing the purpose of norms by social goals and by revising the constitutive rules defining the applicability of norms. We illustrate the interpretation mechanism by examples.}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/kr/2010}, Ee = {http://aaai.org/ocs/index.php/KR/KR2010/paper/view/1379}, Url = {http://aaai.org/ocs/index.php/KR/KR2010/paper/view/1379} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/jurix/BoellaGRT09, Title = {{\it Lex Minus Dixit Quam Voluit}, {\it Lex Magis}{\it Dixit Quam Voluit}: A Formal Study on Legal Compliance and Interpretation}, Author = {Guido Boella and Guido Governatori and Antonino Rotolo and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {AICOL Workshops}, Year = {2009}, Pages = {162-183}, Abstract = {This paper argues in favour of the necessity of dynamically restricting and expanding the applicability of norms regulating computer systems like mul- tiagent systems, in situations where the compliance to the norm does not achieve the purpose of the norm. We propose a logical framework which distinguishes between constitutive and regulative norms and captures the norm change power and at the same time the limitations of the judicial system in dynamically revis- ing the set of constitutive rules defining the concepts on which the applicability of norms is based. In particular, the framework is used to reconstruct some in- terpretive arguments described in legal theory such as those corresponding to the Roman maxims lex minus dixit quam voluit and lex magis dixit quam voluit. The logical framework is based on an extension of defeasible logic.}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/jurix/2009aicol}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-16524-5_11}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-16524-5_11} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/atal/BoellaHTT05, Title = {Modeling Control Mechanisms with Normative Multiagent Systems: The Case of the Renewables Obligation}, Author = {Guido Boella and Joris Hulstijn and Yao-Hua Tan and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {AAMAS Workshops}, Year = {2005}, Pages = {114-126}, Abstract = {This paper is about control mechanisms for virtual organizations. As a case study, we discuss the Renewables Obligation (RO), a control mechanism that was introduced in the United Kingdom to stimulate the production of renewable energy. We apply a conceptual model based on normative multiagent systems (NMAS). We propose to model both the participants and the normative system as autonomous agents, having beliefs and goals. Norms, which can be internalized by the agents as obligations, are translated into conditional beliefs and goals of the normative system, which concern both detection and sanctioning measures. We show that the model can handle both the regulative and the evidential aspects of the case.}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/atal/2005w}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/11775331_8}, Url = {http://www.springerlink.com/content/kj2017uj02421741/} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/hicss/BoellaHT05, Title = {Virtual Organizations as Normative Multiagent Systems}, Author = {Guido Boella and Joris Hulstijn and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {HICSS}, Year = {2005}, Abstract = {In this paper we propose a conceptual model of virtual organizations as normative multiagent systems. The dynamic aspects of virtual organizations are modeled using aspects of speech act theory and Searle's theory of the construction of social reality. We illustrate the use of our model by discussing an example of distributed access control policies. We show how the model captures the distinction between local and global authorities, and between local and global norm enforcement policies.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/hicss05b.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/hicss/2005}, Ee = {http://doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/HICSS.2005.677}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/hicss05b.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/iat/BoellaHT05, Title = {A Synthesis Between Mental Attitudes and Social Commitments in Agent Communication Languages}, Author = {Guido Boella and Joris Hulstijn and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {IAT}, Year = {2005}, Pages = {358-364}, Abstract = {There are two main traditions in defining a semantics for agent communication languages, based either on mental attitudes or on social commitments. In this paper we show how the role metaphor can be used to bridge the gap between these two approaches. First, we show how dialogues can be modelled as games - a form of normative systems - and how mental attitudes can be attributed not only to agents, but also, in a public manner, to the roles of the game. The dialogue moves allow an agent playing a role to modify the roles' mental states, as specified by the counts-as conditionals (also known as constitutive norms) defining the game. The player of a role is expected to act as if it has the mental attitudes attributed to its role during the dialogue and to prevent its role's mental attitudes from becoming incoherent, as it does for its own private mental attitudes. Secondly, we show how roles as descriptions of expected behavior maintain the normative character of social semantics. Due to the bridge between the two approaches, results and tools from one approach can be used in the other one. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/iat05.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/iat/2005}, Ee = {http://doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/IAT.2005.21}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/iat05.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/webi/BoellaHT05, Title = {Argument Games for Interactive Access Control}, Author = {Guido Boella and Joris Hulstijn and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Web Intelligence}, Year = {2005}, Pages = {751-754}, Abstract = {We are interested in interactive access control to web services in virtual organizations. We discuss argument games in which the set of credentials requested by the service provider to access a service is established by means of an interaction between a client acting as a proponent and a server acting as an opponent.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/wi05.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/webi/2005}, Ee = {http://doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/WI.2005.35}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/wi05.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/argmas/BoellaKT09, Title = {Dynamics in Argumentation with Single Extensions: Attack Refinement and the Grounded Extension (Extended Version)}, Author = {Guido Boella and Souhila Kaci and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {ArgMAS}, Year = {2009}, Pages = {150-159}, Abstract = {In this paper we consider the dynamics of abstract argumentation in Baroni and Giacomin's framework for the evaluation of extension based argumentation semantics. FOllowing Baroni and Giacomin, we do not consider individual approaches, but we define general properties or postulates that individual approaches may satisfy. In particular, we define refinement properties for the attack relation in the framework. We illustrate the properties on the grounded extension. In this paper we consider only properties for the single extension case, and leave the multiple extension case to further research.}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/argmas/2009}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-12805-9_9}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-12805-9_9} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/atal/BoellaKT09, Title = {Dynamics in argumentation with single extensions: attack refinement and the grounded extension}, Author = {Guido Boella and Souhila Kaci and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {AAMAS (2)}, Year = {2009}, Pages = {1213-1214}, Abstract = {We introduce nine attack refinement principles stating whether the extension stays the same if we add a single attack, and we show that the grounded extension satisfies five of them. We define also an extension called acyclic attack refinement by adding a loop con- dition, and we show that the grounded extension satisfies one of the acyclic attack refinement principles. Moreover, we define an extension called conditional attack refinement taking alternative at- tackers into account, and we give an example of a conditional attack refinement principle satisfied by the grounded extension.}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/atal/2009-2}, Ee = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1558109.1558218}, Url = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1558109.1558218} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/atal/BoellaST05, Title = {Reducing coalition structures via agreement specification}, Author = {Guido Boella and Luigi Sauro and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {AAMAS}, Year = {2005}, Pages = {1187-1188}, Abstract = {The concept of power plays an important role in the social sciences and Castelfranchi [4] emphasizes the importance of this concept for multiagent systems. In [2] we build upon this work by distinguishing four viewpoints on multiagent systems: a mind structure, a power structure, a dependence structure and a coalition structure. These viewpoints are increasingly abstract conceptualizations of systems as collections of autonomous cognitive agents. In [1] we propose a way to define coalition structures from power structures. In this paper we refine this approach using task based power views, and we relate it to central notions in game theory.}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/atal/2005}, Ee = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1082473.1082686}, File = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/aamas05b.pdf}, Url = {http://dl.acm.org/authorize?872596} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/iat/BoellaST05, Title = {Admissible Agreements among Goal-directed Agents}, Author = {Guido Boella and Luigi Sauro and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {IAT}, Year = {2005}, Pages = {543-554}, Abstract = {We study admissible coalitions in goal-directed multiagent systems.We define a qualitative criterion of admissibility in which a coalition has itself all the necessary information to check admissibility. We show also that, under some assumptions on preference relations of the agents, this admissibility criterion can be used to reduce the search space in a game theoretical approach.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/iat05b.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/iat/2005}, Ee = {http://doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/IAT.2005.27}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/iat05b.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/atal/BoellaST04, Title = {Social Viewpoints on Multiagent Systems}, Author = {Guido Boella and Luigi Sauro and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {AAMAS}, Year = {2004}, Pages = {1358-1359}, Abstract = {An important aim in the field of multiagent systems is to study emergent social structures, such as sets and collectives. Castelfranchi introduces concepts like groups and collectives from social theory in agent theory, both to enrich agent theory and to develop experimental, conceptual and theoretical new instruments for the social sciences. In this paper we contribute to this project by addressing the following questions: How to relate conceptual models based on the mind, power, dependence, or coalitions? How to use these models and relations in agent theory? How to formalize these models and relations between them?}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/aamas04d.ps}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/atal/2004}, Ee = {http://csdl.computer.org/comp/proceedings/aamas/2004/2092/03/20921358abs.htm}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/aamas04d.ps} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/ecai/BoellaST04, Title = {An Abstraction from Power to Coalition Structures}, Author = {Guido Boella and Luigi Sauro and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {ECAI}, Year = {2004}, Pages = {965-966}, Abstract = {The concept of power plays an important role in the social sciences and Castelfranchi [2, 3] emphasizes the importance of this concept for multiagent systems. In [1] we build upon this work by distinguishing four viewpoints on multiagent systems: a mind structure, a power structure, a dependence structure and a coalition structure. These viewpoints are increasingly abstract conceptualizations of systems as collections of autonomous cognitive agents. In this paper we formally define one kind of power and coalition structures, and an abstraction from this power to its coalition structure.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ecai04b.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/ecai/2004}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ecai04b.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/iat/BoellaST04, Title = {Power and Dependence Relations in Groups of Agents}, Author = {Guido Boella and Luigi Sauro and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {IAT}, Year = {2004}, Pages = {246-252}, Abstract = {In this paper we present a formal model of Multiagent Systems to analyze the relations of power and dependence underlying group behaviors such as cooperation. Inspired by the work of Castelfranchi we define these relations by means of a description of goals and skills of single agents. We show how our framework can be used to describe social and organizational structures as emergent properties of a collection of individuals.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/iat04.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/iat/2004}, Ee = {http://csdl.computer.org/comp/proceedings/iat/2004/2101/00/21010246abs.htm}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/iat04.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/ecai/BoellaT12, Title = {Reasoning for Agreement Technologies}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {ECAI}, Year = {2012}, Pages = {895-896}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/ecai/2012}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-098-7-895}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ecai2012_reasoningforagreement.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/atal/BoellaT05a, Title = {Organizations in Artificial Social Systems}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {AAMAS Workshops}, Year = {2005}, Pages = {198-210}, Abstract = {In this paper we introduce organizations and roles in Shoham and Tennenholtz' artificial social systems, using a normative system. We model how real agents determine the behavior of organizations by playing roles in the organization, and how the organization controls the behavior of agents playing a role in it. We consider the design of an organization in terms of roles and the assignment of agents to roles, and the evolution of organizations. We do not present a complete formalization of the computational problems, but we illustrate our approach by examples. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ooop05.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/atal/2005w}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/11775331_14}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ooop05.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/atal/BoellaTV09, Title = {Conditional Dependence Networks in Requirements Engineering}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert van der Torre and Serena Villata}, Booktitle = {COIN@AAMAS{\&}IJCAI{\&}MALLOW}, Year = {2009}, Pages = {3-18}, Abstract = {In this paper we present a new model for the requirements analysis of a system. We offer a conceptual model defined following a visual modeling language, called dependence networks. TROPOS uses a visual modeling language called dependence networks in the requirements analysis of a system, and in this paper we propose a new conceptual model extending dependence networks with norms. This improvement allows to define a new type of dependence networks, called conditional dependence networks, representing a new modeling technique for the requirements analysis of a system. Our model, moreover, allows the definition of coalition depending on different kinds of networks. We illustrate our model using the scenario of virtual organizations based on a Grid network.}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/atal/2009coin}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-14962-7_1}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-14962-7_1} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/atal/BoellaT06, Title = {An architecture of a normative system: counts-as conditionals, obligations and permissions}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {AAMAS}, Year = {2006}, Pages = {229-231}, Abstract = {Normative systems are traditionally described and analyzed using deontic logic, describing the logical relations among obligations and permissions. However, there is still a gap between deontic logic and normative multi-agent systems such as electronic institutions, which may be seen as an instance of the gap between on the one hand logical agent specification languages and on the other hand agent architectures and programming languages. To bridge the gap, in this paper we propose an architecture containing separate subsystems or components for counts-as conditionals, conditional obligations and conditional permissions. We add a norm database component in which the three kinds of rules are stored, and we use a channel based coordination model to describe the relations among the four normative components.}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/atal/2006}, Ee = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1160633.1160671}, File = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/aamas06a.pdf}, Url = {http://dl.acm.org/authorize?829104} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/atal/BoellaT05, Title = {Enforceable social laws}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {AAMAS}, Year = {2005}, Pages = {682-689}, Abstract = {In this paper we study the enforcement of social laws in artificial social systems using a control system. We define the enforceable social law problem as an extension of Tennenholtz' stable social law problem. We distinguish the choice of social laws from the choice of control systems, where the latter leads to new computational problems. We consider also properties of sanction based control systems, and monitoring when there is no full observability.}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/atal/2005}, Ee = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1082473.1082577}, File = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/aamas05a.pdf}, Url = {http://dl.acm.org/authorize?873165} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/clima/BoellaT05, Title = {Constitutive Norms in the Design of Normative Multiagent Systems}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {CLIMA VI}, Year = {2005}, Pages = {303-319}, Abstract = {In this paper, we consider the design of normative multiagent systems composed of both constitutive and regulative norms. We analyze the properties of constitutive norms, in particular their lack of reflexivity, and the trade-off between constitutive and regulative norms in the design of normative systems. As methodology we use the metaphor of describing social entities as agents and of attributing them mental attitudes. In this agent metaphor, regulative norms expressing obligations and permissions are modelled as goals of social entities, and constitutive norms expressing "counts-as" relations are their beliefs.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/clima05.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/clima/2005}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/11750734_17}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/clima05.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/iat/BoellaT05, Title = {Role-based Rights in Artificial Social Systems}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {IAT}, Year = {2005}, Pages = {516-519}, Abstract = {In this paper we use normative systems to introduce roles and rights in the game-theoretic artificial social systems developed by Shoham and Tennenholtz. We model normative systems as socially constructed agents whose behavior is determined by a set of role playing agents. Roles are again modeled as socially constructed agents, and the roles' behavior is the ideal behavior of agents playing the roles. In our approach, the strategies of the role correspond to the rights that can be exercised by the role. In other words, rights are powers extending the set of strategies of an agent - not constraining them! - due to the new opportunities to exercise rights. We consider the role assignment problem of how to assign agents to roles such that the role playing agent is expected to behave like the ideal behavior of the role. We also consider how the normative system controls the behavior of agents playing a role in it. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/iat05a.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/iat/2005}, Ee = {http://doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/IAT.2005.123}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/iat05a.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/icail/BoellaT05, Title = {Permission and Authorization in Normative Multiagent Systems}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {ICAIL}, Year = {2005}, Pages = {236-237}, Abstract = {The distinction between the notions of permission and authorization is subtle. In the Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary [4] permitting is "to allow something", "to make it possible for someone to do something, or to not prevent something from happening", while authorizing means "to give someone official permission to do something". Law studies argue that the distinction goes beyond the "officiality" of authorization. E.g., the Del Giudice [5]'s dictionary of law argues that adding or removing an authorization does not change the normative status of an agent while adding or removing a permission does. Authorizations change what is obligatory or permitted for agents without adding or removing norms. However, though legal philosophers distinguish permission from authorization, the distinction between the two is ignored in many (agent) theories and systems. How can this apparent paradox be explained? }, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/icail/2005}, File = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/icail05.pdf}, Url = {http://dl.acm.org/authorize?837692} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/ijcai/BoellaT05, Title = {A Non-monotonic Logic for Specifying and Querying Preferences}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {IJCAI}, Year = {2005}, Pages = {1549-1550}, Abstract = {a Preferences are becoming of greater interest in many areas of artificial intelligence, such as knowledge representation, multiagent systems, constraint satisfaction, decision making, and decision-theoretic planning. In the logic of preference there is a debate when a set of preferences should be consistent. For example, Bacchus and Grove [1996] criticize ceteris paribus preferences, because {} should be consistent, and they criticize most existing logics of preference, because {} should be consistent. In order not to restrict the use of the logic of preference, we propose a minimal logic of preference in which any set of specified preferences is consistent. To make it useful for practical applications, we extend this logic to specify preferences with a logic to query preferences, and with a nonmonotonic reasoning mechanism.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ijcai05a.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/ijcai/2005}, Ee = {http://www.ijcai.org/papers/post-0122.pdf}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ijcai05a.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/ijcai/BoellaT05a, Title = {The Evolution of Artificial Social Systems}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {IJCAI}, Year = {2005}, Pages = {1655-1556}, Abstract = {The basic idea of the artificial social systems approach of Shoham and Tennenholtz [1995; 1997] is to add a mechanism, called a social law, that will minimize the need for both centralized control and on-line resolution of conflicts. A social law is defined as a set of restrictions on the agents's activities which allow them enough freedom on the one hand, but at the same time constrain them so that they will not interfere with each other. Several variants have been introduced to reason about the design and emergence of social laws. However, existing models of artificial social systems cannot be used for the evolution of such systems, because these models do not contain an explicit representation of the social laws in force. In this paper we use enforceable social laws [Boella and van der Torre, 2005] to address the question how artificial social systems can be extended to reason about the evolution of artificial social systems. }, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/ijcai/2005}, Ee = {http://www.ijcai.org/papers/post-0129.pdf}, File = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ijcai05b.pdf}, Url = {http://dl.acm.org/authorize?873165} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/ACMicec/BoellaT04, Title = {Attributing mental attitudes to roles: the agent metaphor applied to e-trade organizations}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {ICEC}, Year = {2004}, Pages = {130-137}, Abstract = {In this paper we address the problem of defining roles in organizations like e-trade ones. The methodology we use is to model roles according to the agent metaphor: we attribute to roles mental attitudes, like beliefs, desires and goals, we relate them to the agents required expertise and responsibilities, and we model role behavior in game theoretic terms. Analogously, the organization is modelled as an agent which acts as a normative system: it imposes obligations to roles and to the agents playing the roles.}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/ACMicec/2004}, Ee = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1052220.1052237}, File = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/icec04.pdf}, Url = {http://dl.acm.org/authorize?859284} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/atal/BoellaT04, Title = {Contracts as Legal Institutions in Organizations of Autonomous Agents}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {AAMAS}, Year = {2004}, Pages = {948-955}, Abstract = {In this paper we address the problem of how the autonomy of agents in an organization can be enhanced by means of contracts. Contracts are modelled as legal institutions: systems of legal rules which allow to change the regulative and constitutive norms of an organization. The methodology we use is to attribute to organizations mental attitudes, beliefs, desires and goals, and to take into account their behavior by using recursive modelling. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/aamas04b.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/atal/2004}, Ee = {http://csdl.computer.org/comp/proceedings/aamas/2004/2092/02/20920948abs.htm}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/aamas04b.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/atal/BoellaT04a, Title = {Groups as Agents with Mental Attitudes}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {AAMAS}, Year = {2004}, Pages = {964-971}, Abstract = {We discuss a model of cooperation among autonomous agents, based on the attribution of mental attitudes to groups: these attitudes represent the shared beliefs and objectives and the wish to reduce the costs for the members. When agents take a decision they have to recursively model what their partners are expected to do under the assumption that they are cooperative, and they have to adopt the goals and desires attributed to the group: otherwise, the other members consider them uncooperative and thus liable. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/aamas04a.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/atal/2004}, Ee = {http://csdl.computer.org/comp/proceedings/aamas/2004/2092/02/20920964abs.htm}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/aamas04a.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/atal/BoellaT04b, Title = {Normative Multiagent Systems and Trust Dynamics}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Trusting Agents for Trusting Electronic Societies}, Year = {2004}, Pages = {1-17}, Abstract = {a In this paper we use recursive modelling to formalize sanction-based obligations in a qualitative game theory. In particular, we formalize an agent who attributes mental attitudes such as goals and desires to the normative system which creates and enforces its obligations. The wishes (goals) of the normative system are the commands (obligations) of the agent. Since the agent is able to reason about the normative systems behavior, our model accounts for many ways in which an agent can violate a norm believing that it will not be sanctioned. We thus propose a cognitive theory of normative reasoning which can be applied in theories requiring dynamic trust to understand when it is necessary to revise it.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/trust04.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/atal/2004trust}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/11532095_1}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/trust04.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/deon/BoellaT04, Title = {Delta: The Social Delegation Cycle}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {DEON}, Year = {2004}, Pages = {29-42}, Abstract = {In this paper we consider the relation between desires and obligations in normative multiagent systems. We introduce a model of their relation based on what we call the social delegation cycle, which explains the creation of norms from agent desires in three steps. First individual agent desires generate group goals, then a group goal is individualized in a social norm, and finally the norm is accepted by the agents when it leads to the fulfilment of the desires the cycle started with. We formalize the social delegation cycle by formalizing goal generation as a merging process of the individual agent desires, we formalize norm creation as a planning process for both the obligation and the associated sanctions or rewards, and we formalize the acceptance relation as both a belief of agents that the fulfilment of the norm leads to achievement of their desires, and the belief that other agents will act according to the norm. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/deon04.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/deon/2004}, Ee = {http://springerlink.metapress.com/openurl.asp?genre=article{\&}issn=0302-9743{\&}volume=3065{\&}spage=29}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/deon04.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/ecai/BoellaT04, Title = {Negotiating the Distribution of Obligations with Sanctions among Autonomous Agents}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {ECAI}, Year = {2004}, Pages = {13-17}, Abstract = {In this paper we study the distribution of obligations together with their associated sanctions among agents belonging to collective entities like groups and organizations. We model the distribution as a negotiation process among the agents, we model the behavior of the agents in a qualitative game theory, and we formalize them in a logical framework. We characterize collective obligations according to the way the responsibility in case of violation is attributed to individual agents or to the whole set of agents, where we distinguish among violations during the negotiation and during the execution of the task. We also show that in some cases it is a drawback to be the only agent able to see to the fulfilment of part of an obligation, but in other cases it may be an advantage, because of the power it gives to the agent during the negotiation.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ecai04.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/ecai/2004}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ecai04.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/esaw/BoellaT04, Title = {Organizations as Socially Constructed Agents in the Agent Oriented Paradigm}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {ESAW}, Year = {2004}, Pages = {1-13}, Abstract = {In this paper we propose a new role for the agent metaphor in the definition of the organizational structure of multiagent systems. The agent metaphor is extended to consider as agents also social entities like organizations, groups and normative systems, so that mental attitudes can be attributed to them - beliefs, desires and goals - and also an autonomous and proactive behavior. We show how the metaphor can be applied also to structure organizations in functional areas and roles, which are described as agents too. Thus, the agent metaphor can play a role similar to the object oriented metaphor which allows structuring objects in component objects. Finally, we discuss how the agent metaphor addresses the problems of control and communication in such structured organizations.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/esaw04.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/esaw/2004}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/11423355_1}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/esaw04.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/iat/BoellaT04, Title = {Fulfilling or Violating Obligations in Normative Multiagent Systems}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {IAT}, Year = {2004}, Pages = {483-486}, Abstract = {A theory of rational decision making in normative multiagent systems has to distinguish among the many reasons why agents fulfill or violate obligations. We propose a classification of such reasons for single cognitive agent decision making in a single normative system, based on the increasing complexity of this agent. In the first class we only consider the agents motivations, in the second class we consider also its abilities, in the third class we consider also its beliefs, and finally we consider also sensing actions to observe the environment. We sketch how the reasons can be formalized in a normative multiagent system with increasingly complex cognitive agents. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/iat04a.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/iat/2004}, Ee = {http://csdl.computer.org/comp/proceedings/iat/2004/2101/00/21010483abs.htm}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/iat04a.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/iat/BoellaT04a, Title = {Game Specification in Normative Multiagent System: The Trias Politica}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {IAT}, Year = {2004}, Pages = {504-508}, Abstract = {In this paper we formalize the specification of games in the trias politica using Rao and Georgeffs specification language BDICTL*. In particular, we generalize Rao and Georgeff's specification of single agent decision trees to multiagent games, for which we introduce observations and recursive modelling, in this setting we formalize obligations, and we characterize four kinds of agents, called legislators, judges, policemen and citizens. Legislators are characterized by their power to create and revise obligations, judges are characterized by their power to count behavior of citizens as violations, and policemen are characterized by their ability to sanction behavior. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/iat04b.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/iat/2004}, Ee = {http://csdl.computer.org/comp/proceedings/iat/2004/2101/00/21010504abs.htm}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/iat04b.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/kr/BoellaT04, Title = {Regulative and Constitutive Norms in Normative Multiagent Systems}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {KR}, Year = {2004}, Pages = {255-266}, Abstract = {In this paper we introduce a formal framework for the construction of normative multiagent systems, based on Searle s notion of the construction of social reality. Within the structure of normative multiagent systems we distinguish between regulative norms that describe obligations, prohibitions and permissions, and constitutive norms that regulate the creation of institutional facts as well as the modification of the normative system itself. Using the metaphor of normative systems as agents, we attribute mental attitudes to the normative system. In particular, we formalize regulative norms as goals of the normative system, and constitutive norms as beliefs of the normative system. Agents reason about norm creation using recursive modelling. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/kr04.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/kr/2004}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/kr04.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/webi/BoellaT04, Title = {Local vs Global Policies and Centralized vs Decentralized Control in Virtual Communities of Agents}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Web Intelligence}, Year = {2004}, Pages = {690-693}, Abstract = {We are interested in the design of policies for virtual communities of agents based on the grid infrastructure. In a virtual community agents can play both the role of resource consumers and the role of resource providers, and they remain in control of their resources. We argue that this requirement creates a distinction between two dimensions: global vs local and centralized and decentralized control by means of policies. The providers should be enabled to specify their local policies on their own resources, but their policies should be consistent with the global policies. At the same time, some aspects of the decentralized control should be delegated to specialized providers; this delegation requires a distinction between the authorization to access a resource and a permission to do so. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/wi04.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/webi/2004}, Ee = {http://doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/WI.2004.89}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/wi04.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/woa/BoellaT04, Title = {Organizations as Socially Constructed Agents in the Agent Oriented Paradigm}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {WOA}, Year = {2004}, Pages = {93-99}, Abstract = {In this paper we propose a new role for the agent metaphor in the definition of the organizational structure of multiagent systems. The agent metaphor is extended to consider as agents also social entities like organizations, groups and normative systems, so that mental attitudes can be attributed to them- beliefs, desires and goals- and also an autonomous and proactive behavior. We show how the metaphor can be applied also to structure organizations in functional areas and roles, which are described as agents too. Thus, the agent metaphor can play a role similar to the object oriented metaphor which allows structuring objects in component objects. Finally, we discuss how the agent metaphor addresses the problems of control and communication in such structured organizations}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/woa/2004}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/woa04.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/aiia/BoellaT03, Title = {Obligations as Social Constructs}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {AI*IA}, Year = {2003}, Pages = {27-38}, Abstract = {In this paper we formalize sanction-based obligations in the context of Searle's notion of construction of social reality. In particular, we define obligations using a counts as conditional, Anderson's reduction to alethic modal logic and Boella and Lesmo's normative agent. Our analysis presents an alternative criticism to the weakening rule, which has already been criticized in the philosophical literature for its role in the Ross paradox and the Forrester paradox, and the analysis presents a criticism to the generally accepted conjunction rule. Moreover, we show a possible application of these results in a qualitative decision theory. Finally, our analysis also contributes to philosophical discussions such as the distinction between violations and sanctions in Anderson's reduction, and between implicit and explicit normative systems. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/aiia03.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/aiia/2003}, Ee = {http://springerlink.metapress.com/openurl.asp?genre=article{\&}issn=0302-9743{\&}volume=2829{\&}spage=27}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/aiia03.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/atal/BoellaT03, Title = {Attributing mental attitudes to normative systems}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {AAMAS}, Year = {2003}, Pages = {942-943}, Abstract = {In agent theory mental attitudes such as beliefs, desires, goals and intentions are attributed to autonomous computer systems to facilitate the specification, design and implementation of such systems. Using the methodology of this intentional stance we can say that, for example, the system believes the records in its database, or that the system responds to the user's request -- or it neglects it! -- because it desires to do so. Boella and Lesmo suggest that analogously we can attribute mental attitudes to normative systems like security, legal or moral systems, such that obligations of an agent can be interpreted as the desires or goals of the normative system. The motivation of their interpretation is the study of reasons why agents fulfill or violate sanction-based obligations. In this paper we are interested in the attribution of mental attitudes to normative multiagent systems to facilitate their specification, design and implementation. One of the roles of obligations in multiagent systems is to stabilize the behavior of a multiagent system, and obligations thus play the same role for multiagent systems as intentions do for single agent systems. We address the following two questions: How can the attribution of mental attitudes to normative multiagent systems be explained? How can the attribution of mental attitudes to normative systems be used in agent theory?}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/atal/2003}, Ee = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/860575.860736}, File = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/aamas03.pdf}, Url = {http://dl.acm.org/authorize?767096} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/iat/BoellaT03, Title = {Norm Governed Multiagent Systems: The Delegation of Control to Autonomous Agents}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {IAT}, Year = {2003}, Pages = {329-335}, Abstract = {When agents make decisions, they have to deal with norms regulating the system. In this paper we therefore propose a rule-based qualitative decision and game theory combining ideas from multiagent systems and normative systems. Whereas normative systems are typically modelled as a single authority that imposes obligations and permissions on the agents, our theory is based on a multiagent structure of the normative system. We distinguish between agents whose behavior is governed by norms, so-called defender agents who have the duty to monitor violations of these norms and apply sanctions, and autonomous normative systems that issue norms and watch over the behavior of defender agents. We show that autonomous normative systems can delegate monitoring and sanctioning of violations to defender agents, when bearers of obligations model defender agents, which in turn model autonomous normative systems.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/iat03.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/iat/2003}, Ee = {http://csdl.computer.org/comp/proceedings/iat/2003/1931/00/19310329abs.htm}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/iat03.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/ismis/BoellaT03, Title = {Decentralized Control: Obligations and Permissions in Virtual Communities of Agents}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {ISMIS}, Year = {2003}, Pages = {618-622}, Abstract = {In this paper we introduce a model of local and global control policies regulating decentralized virtual communities of heterogeneous agents. We illustrate how the model can be formalized if agents attribute mental attitudes to normative systems. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ismis03.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/ismis/2003}, Ee = {http://springerlink.metapress.com/openurl.asp?genre=article{\&}issn=0302-9743{\&}volume=2871{\&}spage=618}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ismis03.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/webi/BoellaT03, Title = {Local Policies for the Control of Virtual Communities}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Web Intelligence}, Year = {2003}, Pages = {161-167}, Abstract = {In this paper we study the rational balance between local and global policies in web based distributed systems. We use a logical framework for multiagent systems to model obligations and permissions composing policies. In particular, a qualitative decision theory allows agents to trade off the decision of respecting a norm against the consequences of not respecting it: the possibility that they are considered violators and thus sanctioned. Global policies refer not to the existence of a local norm but to the fact that it is enforced by the local authority by recognizing and sanctioning violations. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/wi03.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/webi/2003}, Ee = {http://csdl.computer.org/comp/proceedings/wi/2003/1932/00/19320161abs.htm}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/wi03.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/woa/BoellaT03, Title = {Policy Management for Virtual Communities of Agents}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {WOA}, Year = {2003}, Pages = {57-64}, Abstract = {In this paper we study the rational balance between local and global policies in virtual communities of agents. To study this problem we use a logical framework for modelling obligations and permissions in multiagent systems. In particular, the logical framework allows agents to trade off the decision of respecting a norm against the consequences of not respecting it: the possibility that they are considered violators and thus sanctioned. To formalize decision making we use a qualitative game theory. n-player games are based on recursive modelling: the bearer of a norm models the behavior of local normative authorities as agents who are in turn subject to other norms and thus model global normative agents.}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/woa/2003}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/woa03.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/normas/BoellaTV05, Title = {Introduction to Normative Multiagent Systems}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert W. N. van der Torre and Harko Verhagen}, Booktitle = {NORMAS}, Year = {2005}, Pages = {1-7}, Abstract = {In this paper we give a short introduction to the emerging area of normative multiagent systems by presenting definitions and examples.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/aisb05.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/normas/2005}, Ee = {http://www.aisb.org.uk/publications/proceedings/aisb05/8_Normas_Final.pdf}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/aisb05.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/atal/BoellaTGGIT11, Title = {Neural symbolic architecture for normative agents}, Author = {Guido Boella and Silvano Colombo Tosatto and Artur S. d'Avila Garcez and Valerio Genovese and Dino Ienco and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {AAMAS}, Year = {2011}, Pages = {1203-1204}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/atal/2011}, Ee = {http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2034488{\&}CFID=69154334{\&}CFTOKEN=45298625}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/aamas2011_Neural.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/aamas/BoellaTGGPT12, Title = {Learning and reasoning about norms using neural-symbolic systems}, Author = {Guido Boella and Silvano Colombo Tosatto and Artur S. d'Avila Garcez and Valerio Genovese and Alan Perotti and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {AAMAS}, Year = {2012}, Pages = {1023-1030}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/atal/2012}, Ee = {http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2343843}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ifaamas2012_learningandreasoning.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/iri/BoerBGSST05, Title = {Change impact analysis of enterprise architectures}, Author = {Frank S. de Boer and Marcello M. Bonsangue and Luuk Groenewegen and Andries Stam and S. Stevens and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {IRI}, Year = {2005}, Pages = {177-181}, Abstract = {An enterprise architecture is a high-level description intended to capture the vision of an enterprise integrating all its dimensions: organization structure, business processes, and infrastructure. Every single part of an enterprise is subject to change, and each change may have significant consequences within all domains of the enterprise. A lot of effort is therefore devoted on maintaining the integrity of an architectural description. In this paper we address the problem of mastering the ripple effects of a proposed change. This allows architects to assess the consequences of a particular change to the enterprise, so to identify potential impacts of a change before it actually takes place. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/iri05.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/iri/2005}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/IRI-05.2005.1506470}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/iri05.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/hicss/BoerBJST05, Title = {Enterprise Architecture Analysis with {XML}}, Author = {Frank S. de Boer and Marcello M. Bonsangue and Joost Jacob and Andries Stam and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {HICSS}, Year = {2005}, Abstract = {This paper shows how XML can be used for static and dynamic analysis of architectures. Our analysis is based on the distinction between symbolic and semantic models of architectures. The core of a symbolic model consists of its signature that specifies symbolically its structural elements and their relationships. A semantic model is defined as a formal interpretation of the symbolic model. This provides a formal approach to the design of architectural description languages and a general mathematical foundation for the use of formal methods in enterprise architectures. For dynamic analysis we define transformations of models of architectures, modeled in XML, and for this purpose the XML vocabulary for an architecture is extended with a few constructs defined in the Rule Markup Language (RML). There are RML tools available that perform the desired transformations.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/hicss05.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/hicss/2005}, Ee = {http://doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/HICSS.2005.242}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/hicss05.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/edoc/BoerBJST04, Title = {A Logical Viewpoint on Architectures}, Author = {Frank S. de Boer and Marcello M. Bonsangue and Joost Jacob and Andries Stam and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {EDOC}, Year = {2004}, Pages = {73-83}, Abstract = {In this paper we introduce a logical viewpoint on architectures. The logical viewpoint is based on the distinction between symbolic and semantic models of architectures. The core of a symbolic model consists of its signature that specifies symbolically its structural elements and their relationships. A semantic model is defined as a formal interpretation of the symbolic model. This leads to more precise characterization of the concepts introduced in IEEE standard 1471-2000, and provides a formal approach to the design of enterprise of architectural description languages and a general mathematical foundation for the use of formal methods in enterprise architectures. Additionally, we show how this logical viewpoint allows for the definition of a simple general XML language for the description of both static and dynamic aspects of an architecture. For the meta-analysis of both these aspects we introduce a new XML tool for general XML transformations based on a Rule Markup Language.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/edoc04.ps}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/edoc/2004}, Ee = {http://csdl.computer.org/comp/proceedings/edoc/2004/2214/00/22140073abs.htm}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/edoc04.ps} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/ecai/BoothGKRT14, Title = {Abduction and Dialogical Proof in Argumentation and Logic Programming}, Author = {Richard Booth and Dov M. Gabbay and Souhila Kaci and Tjitze Rienstra and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {{ECAI} 2014 - 21st European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 18-22 August 2014, Prague, Czech Republic - Including Prestigious Applications of Intelligent Systems {(PAIS} 2014)}, Year = {2014}, Pages = {117--122}, Bibsource = {dblp computer science bibliography, http://dblp.org}, Biburl = {http://dblp.uni-trier.de/rec/bib/conf/ecai/BoothGKRT14}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/ecai/2014}, Doi = {10.3233/978-1-61499-419-0-117}, Timestamp = {Thu, 11 Sep 2014 16:14:08 +0200}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-419-0-117} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/comma/BoothKRT12, Title = {Conditional Acceptance Functions}, Author = {Richard Booth and Souhila Kaci and Tjitze Rienstra and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {COMMA}, Year = {2012}, Pages = {470-477}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/comma/2012}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-111-3-470}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/comma2012_conditionalacceptance.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/aose/BosseJLTT05, Title = {Formalisation and Analysis of the Temporal Dynamics of Conditioning}, Author = {Tibor Bosse and Catholijn M. Jonker and Sander A. Los and Leendert W. N. van der Torre and Jan Treur}, Booktitle = {AOSE}, Year = {2005}, Pages = {54-68}, Abstract = {In order to create adaptive Agent Systems with abilities matching those of their biological counterparts, a natural approach is to incorporate classical conditioning mechanisms into such systems. However, existing models for classical conditioning are usually based on differential equations. Since the design of Agent Systems is traditionally based on qualitative conceptual languages, these differential equations are often not directly appropriate to serve as an input for Agent System design. To deal with this problem, this paper explores a formal description and analysis of a conditioning process based on logical specification and analysis methods of dynamic properties of conditioning. Specific types of dynamic properties are global properties, describing properties of the process as a whole, or local properties, describing properties of basic steps in a conditioning process. If the latter type of properties are specified in an executable format, they provide a temporal declarative specification of a simulation model. Global properties can be checked automatically for simulated or other traces. Using these methods the properties of conditioning processes informally expressed by Los and Heuvel [7] have been formalised and verified against a specification of local properties based on Machado [8]'s mathematical model. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/aose05.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/aose/2005}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/11752660_5}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/aose05.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/eurasiaict/BroersenDHT02, Title = {Trust and Commitment in Dynamic Logic}, Author = {Jan Broersen and Mehdi Dastani and Zhisheng Huang and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {EurAsia-ICT}, Year = {2002}, Pages = {677-684}, Abstract = {Trust and commitment have been identified as crucial concepts in electronic commerce applications. In this paper we are interested in the relation between these social concepts. We introduce a dynamic logic in which violations of stronger commitments result in a higher loss of trustworthiness than violations of weaker ones. We illustrate how the logic can be used to analyze some aspects of a well known example of trust within reason.}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/eurasiaict/2002}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/3-540-36087-5_79}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/eurasia02a.ps} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/ijcai/BroersenDT03, Title = {BDIOCTL: Obligations and the Specification of Agent Behavior}, Author = {Jan Broersen and Mehdi Dastani and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {IJCAI}, Year = {2003}, Pages = {1389-1390}, Abstract = {Recently several agent architectures have been proposed that incorporate obligations. However, agent specification or verification languages that take obligations into account have received less attention. Our research question is how properties involving obligations can be specified or verified in an extension of Rao and Georgeff’s BDICTL. In Section 2 we extend BDICTL with so-called Standard Deontic Logic, and in Section 3 and 4 we introduce various single agent and multiagent properties.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ijcai03b.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/ijcai/2003}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ijcai03b.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/ecsqaru/BroersenDT01, Title = {Resolving Conflicts between Beliefs, Obligations, Intentions, and Desires}, Author = {Jan Broersen and Mehdi Dastani and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {ECSQARU}, Year = {2001}, Pages = {568-579}, Abstract = {This paper provides a logical analysis of conflicts between informational, motivational and deliberative attitudes such as beliefs, obligations, intentions, and desires. The contributions are twofold. First, conflict resolutions are classified based on agent types, and formalized in an extension of Reiter's normal default logic. Second, several desiderata for conflict resolutions are introduced, discussed and tested on the logic. The results suggest that Reiter's default logic is too strong, in the sense that a weaker notion of extension is needed to satisfy the desiderata. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ecsqaru01.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/ecsqaru/2001}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44652-4_50}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ecsqaru01.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/deon/BroersenGT12, Title = {Discussion Paper: Changing Norms Is Changing Obligation Change}, Author = {Jan Broersen and Dov M. Gabbay and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {DEON}, Year = {2012}, Pages = {199-214}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/deon/2012}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31570-1_14}, Url = {http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-31570-1_14} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/dagstuhl/BroersenT07, Title = {What an Agent Ought To Do}, Author = {Jan Broersen and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Normative Multi-agent Systems}, Year = {2007}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/dagstuhl/2007P7122}, Ee = {http://drops.dagstuhl.de/opus/volltexte/2007/905}, Url = {http://drops.dagstuhl.de/opus/volltexte/2007/905} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/bnaic/BroersenT05, Title = {Semantic Analysis of {C}hisholm's Paradox}, Author = {Jan Broersen and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {BNAIC}, Year = {2005}, Pages = {28-34}, Abstract = {Violation handling is a crucial problem in many applications. therefore its paradoxes have been studied in, amongst others, artificial intelligence, agent theory and computer science. The standard way to study these paradoxes is to model them using a formal language, and use formal logic to consider whether the set of sentences is inconsistent, the sentences logically follow from others, or some other anomaly occurs. During the past decades, developments in temporal, action and non-monotonic logics have contributed to a better understanding of the paradoxes and thus of violation handling. In this paper we propose an alternative way to analyze Chisholm’s notorious contrary-to-duty paradox in deontic logic. We model the paradox using semantic models, using insights from conceptual modelling. We aim to gain insight in the open question whether the paradoxes are in some sense logical contradictions, or only apparent contradictions. If a paradox is only an apparent contradiction, then there has to be a model interpreting all sentences.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/bnaic05.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/bnaic/2005}, Date-modified = {2011-12-20 17:12:52 +0100}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/bnaic05.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/atal/CaireATS11, Title = {Conviviality measures}, Author = {Patrice Caire and Baptiste Alcalde and Leendert van der Torre and Chattrakul Sombattheera}, Booktitle = {AAMAS}, Year = {2011}, Pages = {895-902}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/atal/2011}, Ee = {http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2031745{\&}CFID=54178199{\&}CFTOKEN=61392764}, Url = {http://www.ifaamas.org/Proceedings/aamas2011/papers/D6_R76.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/ausai/DastaniGRT05, Title = {Preferences of Agents in Defeasible Logic}, Author = {Mehdi Dastani and Guido Governatori and Antonino Rotolo and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Australian Conference on Artificial Intelligence}, Year = {2005}, Pages = {695-704}, Abstract = {We are interested in programming languages for cognitive agents with preferences. We define rule-based agent theories and inference procedures in defeasible logic, and in this setting we discuss patterns of agent behavior called agent types. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ai05.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/ausai/2005}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/11589990_72}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ai05.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/lpar/DastaniGRT05, Title = {Programming Cognitive Agents in Defeasible Logic}, Author = {Mehdi Dastani and Guido Governatori and Antonino Rotolo and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {LPAR}, Year = {2005}, Pages = {621-636}, Abstract = {Defeasible Logic is extended to programming languages for cognitive agents with preferences and actions for planning. We define rule-based agent theories that contain preferences and actions, together with inference procedures.We discuss patterns of agent types in this setting. Finally, we illustrate the language by an example of an agent reasoning about web-services. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/lpar05.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/lpar/2005}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/11591191_43}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/lpar05.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/clima/DastaniHHT04, Title = {Inferring Trust}, Author = {Mehdi Dastani and Andreas Herzig and Joris Hulstijn and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {CLIMA V}, Year = {2004}, Pages = {144-160}, Abstract = {In this paper we discuss Liau's logic of Belief, Inform and Trust (BIT), which captures the use of trust to infer beliefs from acquired information. However, the logic does not capture the derivation of trust from other notions. We therefore suggest the following two extensions. First, like Liau we observe that trust in information from an agent depends on the topic of the information. We extend BIT with a formalization of topics which are used to infer trust in a proposition from trust in another proposition, if both propositions have the same topics. Second, for many applications, communication primitives other than inform are required. We extend BIT with questions, and discuss the relationship with belief, inform and trust. An answer to a question can lead to trust, when the answer conforms to the beliefs of the agent. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/clima04.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/clima/2004V}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/11533092_9}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/clima04.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/aamas/DastaniTY12, Title = {A programming approach to monitoring communication in an organisational environment}, Author = {Mehdi Dastani and Leendert van der Torre and Neil Yorke-Smith}, Booktitle = {AAMAS}, Year = {2012}, Pages = {1373-1374}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/atal/2012}, Ee = {http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2344012}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/aamas2012_programmingapproach.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/atal/DastaniT04, Title = {Programming {BOID}-Plan Agents: Deliberating about Conflicts among Defeasible Mental Attitudes and Plans}, Author = {Mehdi Dastani and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {AAMAS}, Year = {2004}, Pages = {706-713}, Abstract = {In this paper we present an abstract agent programming language and its operational semantics which can be used to implement cognitive agents. This language consists of programming constructs to implement both the agent s mental attitudes interpreted as data structures as well as the agent s deliberation process. The agent can observe the environment, generate goal sets from desires, obligations, and intentions, selects goals, generate plans, and execute them. These actions can be combined in the deliberation language in a variety of ways to program the agent s deliberation process. At the level of abstraction of our deliberation language, goal generation and planning are both characterized as conflict resolution procedures. For goal generation, obligation, desire and intention rules can conflict when the corresponding goals are incompatible. For planning, partial plans can be incompatible. In our approach, the incompatibility of plans can be derived from more detailed data structures such as resources of the agents, but the conflict procedure can also be programmed directly by the agent programmer. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/aamas04c.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/atal/2004}, Ee = {http://csdl.computer.org/comp/proceedings/aamas/2004/2092/02/20920706abs.htm}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/aamas04c.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/jelia/DastaniT04, Title = {Games for Cognitive Agents}, Author = {Mehdi Dastani and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {JELIA}, Year = {2004}, Pages = {5-17}, Abstract = {Strategic games model the interaction among simultaneous decisions of agents. The starting point of strategic games is a set of players (agents) having strategies (decisions) and preferences on the game's outcomes. In this paper we do not assume the decisions and preferences of agents to be given in advance, but we derive them from the agents mental attitudes. We specify such agents, define a mapping from their specification to the specification of the strategic game they play. We discuss a reverse mapping from the specification of strategic games that agents play to a specification of those agents. This mapping can be used to specify a group of agents that can play a strategic game, which shows that the notion of agent system specification is expressive enough to play any kind of game.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/jelia04.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/jelia/2004}, Ee = {http://springerlink.metapress.com/openurl.asp?genre=article{\&}issn=0302-9743{\&}volume=3229{\&}spage=5}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/jelia04.pdf} } @InProceedings{Dastani2002a, Title = {What Is a Normative Goal?: Towards Goal-Based Normative Agent Architectures}, Author = {Mehdi Dastani and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {RASTA}, Year = {2002}, Pages = {210-227}, Abstract = {In this paper we are interested in developing goal-based normative agent architectures. We ask ourselves the question what a normative goal is. To answer this question we introduce a qualitative normative decision theory based on belief (B) and obligation (O) rules. We show that every agent which makes optimal decisions -- which we call a BO rational agent -- acts as if it is maximizing the set of normative goals that will be achieved. This is the basis of our design of goal-based normative agents.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/rasta02final.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/rasta/2002}, Ee = {http://springerlink.metapress.com/openurl.asp?genre=article{\&}issn=0302-9743{\&}volume=2934{\&}spage=210}, Slides = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/rasta02-slides.ps.Z}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/rasta02final.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/eurasiaict/DastaniT02, Title = {Specifying the Merging of Desires into Goals in the Context of Beliefs}, Author = {Mehdi Dastani and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {EurAsia-ICT}, Year = {2002}, Pages = {824-831}, Abstract = {Rao and Georgeff's BDICTL logic is a popular specification and verification language for cognitive agent systems, in which desires and goals are unified into a single motivational attitude. In this paper desires and goals are distinguished to specify the merging of desires into goals, an important process in several agent systems such as Broersen et al.'s BOID system. We therefore introduce a BDGICTL logic. Moreover, we distinguish the merging of conflicting motivational attitudes such as desires into goals from the merging of conflicting informational attitudes such as knowledge bases or belief sources into beliefs, for which we use recent results in variants of belief revision known as semi-revision, fusion or merging. In particular, whereas belief merging is a generalization of revision, desire merging is a generalization of a kind of contraction known as (severe) withdrawal.}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/eurasiaict/2002}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/3-540-36087-5_95}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/eurasia02.ps} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/lpar/DastaniT02, Title = {An Extension of BDI$_{\mbox{CTL}}$ with Functional Dependencies and Components}, Author = {Mehdi Dastani and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {LPAR}, Year = {2002}, Pages = {115-129}, Abstract = {This paper discusses the formal specification of properties that determine the behavior of component based BDI agents, i.e. classical BDI agents in which the mental attitudes are conditional and represented by interconnected components. Some properties, such as realism and commitment strategies, have already been discussed in the BDI literature and can be formally specified by for example Rao and Georgeff's BDICTL formalism. Other properties are specific to component based cognitive agents and cannot be specified by existing BDICTL formalisms. We focus here on the so-called functional dependencies between mental attitudes where a mental attitude is considered to be a function of one or more other mental attitudes. To formally specify the properties of functional dependencies we extend Rao and Georgeff's BDICTL formalism. In particular, for functional dependencies we introduce `only belief', `only desire' and `only intend' operators in the tradition of Levesque's `all I know' operator, and for components we distinguish between `belief in' and `belief out', `desire in' and `desire out', and `intention in' and `intention out' operators. We show how our extended formalism can be used to specify functionality properties such as conservativity, monotonicity, and self-boundedness, as well as properties related to the connections between and control of the components.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/lpar02.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/lpar/2002}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/3-540-36078-6_8}, Slides = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/lpar02-slides.ps.Z}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/lpar02.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/nmr/DastaniT02, Title = {What is a joint goal? Games with beliefs and defeasible desires}, Author = {Mehdi Dastani and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {NMR}, Year = {2002}, Pages = {33-40}, Abstract = {In this paper we introduce a qualitative decision and game theory based on belief (B) and desire (D) rules. We show that a group of agents acts as if it is maximizing achieved joint goals. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/nmr02.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/nmr/2002}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/nmr02.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/rasta/DastaniT02, Title = {What Is a Normative Goal?: Towards Goal-Based Normative Agent Architectures}, Author = {Mehdi Dastani and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {RASTA}, Year = {2002}, Pages = {210-227}, Abstract = {In this paper we are interested in developing goal-based normative agent architectures. We ask ourselves the question what a normative goal is. To answer this question we introduce a qualitative normative decision theory based on belief (B) and obligation (O) rules. We show that every agent which makes optimal decisions – which we call a BO rational agent – acts as if it is maximizing the set of normative goals that will be achieved. This is the basis of our design of goal-based normative agents. }, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/rasta/2002}, Url = {http://www.springerlink.com/content/fe7ffjmpb7gh7fv1/} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/deon/GabbayRSTB14, Title = {Toward a Linguistic Interpretation of Deontic Paradoxes - Beth-Reichenbach Semantics Approach for a New Analysis of the Miners Scenario}, Author = {Dov M. Gabbay and Livio Robaldo and Xin Sun and Leendert W. N. van der Torre and Zohreh Baniasadi}, Booktitle = {Deontic Logic and Normative Systems - 12th International Conference, {DEON} 2014, Ghent, Belgium, July 12-15, 2014. Proceedings}, Year = {2014}, Pages = {108--123}, Bibsource = {dblp computer science bibliography, http://dblp.org}, Biburl = {http://dblp.uni-trier.de/rec/bib/conf/deon/GabbayRSTB14}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/deon/2014}, Doi = {10.1007/978-3-319-08615-6_9}, Timestamp = {Tue, 07 Apr 2015 21:05:14 +0200}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08615-6_9} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/atal/GarionT05, Title = {Design by Contract Deontic Design Language for Multiagent Systems}, Author = {Christophe Garion and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {AAMAS Workshops}, Year = {2005}, Pages = {170-182}, Abstract = {Design by contract is a well known theory that views software construction as based on contracts between clients (callers) and suppliers (routines), relying on mutual obligations and benefits made explicit by assertions. However, there is a gap between this theory and software engineering concepts and tools. For example, dealing with contract violations is realized by exception handlers, whereas it has been observed in the area of deontic logic in computer science that violations and exceptions are distinct concepts that should not be confused. To bridge this gap, we propose a software design language based on temporal deontic logic. Moreover, we show how preferences over the possible outcomes of a supplier can be added. We also discuss the relation between the normative stance toward systems implicit in the design by contract approach and the intentional or BDI stance popular in agent theory.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/anirem05a.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/atal/2005w}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/11775331_12}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/anirem05a.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/stairs/GenoveseRGT10, Title = {Modal Access Control Logic - Axiomatization, Semantics and FOL Theorem Proving}, Author = {Valerio Genovese and Daniele Rispoli and Dov M. Gabbay and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {STAIRS}, Year = {2010}, Pages = {114-126}, Abstract = {We present and study a Modal Access Control Logic (M-ACL) to specify and reason about access control policies. We identify canonical properties of well-known access control axioms. We provide a Hilbert-style proof-system and we prove soundness, completeness and decidability of the logic. We present a sound and complete embedding of Modal Access Control Logic into First-Order Logic. We show how to use SPASS theorem prover to reason about access control policies expressed as formulas of Modal Access Control Logic, and we compare our logic with existing ones.}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/stairs/2010}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/978-1-60750-675-1-114}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/genovese_STAIRS.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/er/GhanavatiHBCRT14, Title = {Compliance with Multiple Regulations}, Author = {Sepideh Ghanavati and Llio Humphreys and Guido Boella and Luigi Di Caro and Livio Robaldo and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Conceptual Modeling - 33rd International Conference, {ER} 2014, Atlanta, GA, USA, October 27-29, 2014. Proceedings}, Year = {2014}, Pages = {415--422}, Bibsource = {dblp computer science bibliography, http://dblp.org}, Biburl = {http://dblp.uni-trier.de/rec/bib/conf/er/GhanavatiHBCRT14}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/er/2014}, Doi = {10.1007/978-3-319-12206-9_35}, Timestamp = {Mon, 13 Oct 2014 12:58:05 +0200}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12206-9_35} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/nmr/HulstijnT04, Title = {Combining goal generation and planning in an argumentation framework}, Author = {Joris Hulstijn and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {NMR}, Year = {2004}, Pages = {212-218}, Abstract = {We study conflicts between goals and plans in Dung's abstract argumentation framework. Argumentation theory has traditionally been used to deal with conflicts between defaults and beliefs. Recently Amgoud has proposed to use it for conflicts between plans. Amgoud argues that Dung's argumentation theory has to be adjusted, because conflicts between plans are fundamentally different from conflicts between defaults. We agree with the fundamental difference, but we propose an alternative way to deal with conflicts between plans that stays within Dung's framework. Moreover, we extend Amgoud s argumentation framework for planning with goal generation procedures, that can deal with conflicts between goals. In the proposed framework goals are derived from desires by forward reasoning, and plans are derived from goals and planning rules by backward reasoning.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/nmr04.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/nmr/2004}, Ee = {http://www.pims.math.ca/science/2004/NMR/papers/paper28.pdf}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/nmr04.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/isola/JacobBBST04, Title = {Using {XML} Transformations for Enterprise Architectures}, Author = {Joost Jacob and Frank S. de Boer and Marcello M. Bonsangue and Andries Stam and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {ISoLA (Preliminary proceedings)}, Year = {2004}, Pages = {67-73}, Abstract = {In this paper we report on the use of XML transformations in the context of Enterprise Architectures. We show that XML transforma- tion techniques are valuable to the analysis, selection and, especially, the visualization of enterprise architectures. We propose a way to describe architectural information within a single XML document. Moreover, we propose transformational techniques to extract views from such a docu- ment and indicate how to perform a specific form of impact analysis on it. The transformations are expressed with the language RML, a compact yet powerful transformation language developed at CWI, which obtains its power from regular expressions defined on XML documents. We dis- cuss a tool that has been built on top of it to visualize the results of the transformations and illustrate the advantages of our approach: the genericity of XML, the application of a single technique (namely XML transformations) for various tasks, and the bene{\^A}¯ts of having a model viewer which is in complete ignorance of the architectural language used.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/isola04.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/isola/2004i}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/isola04.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/edoc/JonkersBABBBDGSHIJLLPSTZ03, Title = {Towards a Language for Coherent Enterprise Architecture Descriptions}, Author = {Henk Jonkers and Ren{\'e} van Buuren and Farhad Arbab and Frank S. de Boer and Marcello M. Bonsangue and Hans Bosma and Hugo W. L. ter Doest and Luuk Groenewegen and Juan Guillen Scholten and Stijn Hoppenbrouwers and Maria-Eugenia Iacob and Wil Janssen and Marc M. Lankhorst and Diederik van Leeuwen and Erik Proper and Andries Stam and Leendert W. N. van der Torre and Gert Veldhuijzen van Zanten}, Booktitle = {EDOC}, Year = {2003}, Pages = {28-39}, Abstract = {A coherent description of architectures provides insight, enables communication among different stakeholders and guides complicated (business and ICT) change proc-esses. Unfortunately, so far no architecture description language exists that fully enables integrated enterprise modelling. In this paper we focus on the requirements and design of such a language. This language defines generic, organisation-independent concepts that can be special-ised or composed to obtain more specific concepts to be used within a particular organisation. It is not our inten-tion to re-invent the wheel for each architectural domain: wherever possible we conform to existing languages or standards such as UML. We complement them with miss-ing concepts, focussing on concepts to model the relation-ships among architectural domains. The concepts should also make it possible to define links between models in other languages. The relationship between architecture descriptions at the business layer and at the application layer (business-IT alignment) plays a central role.}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/edoc/2003}, Ee = {http://csdl.computer.org/comp/proceedings/edoc/2003/1994/00/19940028abs.htm}, Url = {https://doc.telin.nl/dscgi/ds.py/Get/File-29759/Towards_a_Language_for_Coherent_Enterprise_Architecture_Description.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/ecsqaru/KaciT05, Title = {Algorithms for a Nonmonotonic Logic of Preferences}, Author = {Souhila Kaci and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {ECSQARU}, Year = {2005}, Pages = {281-292}, Abstract = {In this paper we introduce and study a nonmonotonic logic to reason about various kinds of preferences. We introduce preference types to choose among these kinds of preferences, based on an agent interpretation. We study ways to calculate "distinguished" preference orders from preferences, and show when these distinguished preference orders are unique. We define algorithms to calculate the distinguished preference orders. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ecsqaru05.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/ecsqaru/2005}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/11518655_25}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ecsqaru05.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/loft/LangT08, Title = {Preference Change Triggered by Belief Change: A Principled Approach}, Author = {J{\'e}r{\^o}me Lang and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {LOFT}, Year = {2008}, Pages = {86-111}, Abstract = {Various tasks need to consider preferences in a dynamic way. To evaluate and classify methods for preference change, we introduce eight properties for preferences evolving after some new fact has been learned. Four properties are concerned with persistence of preferences when something being preferred is (partly) satisfied or dissatisfied, and formalize that preference change indicates that the ideal state has not been reached or has become unreachable. Four other properties are concerned with persistence of preferences when, roughly, the agent learns something she already expected to hold, and formalizes that preference change is due to surprise. We define a family of preference change operators, parameterized by a revision function on epistemic states and a semantics for interpreting preferences over formulas, and we give conditions on the revision function and the semantics of preference for each of the eight conditions to hold.}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/loft/2008}, Date-modified = {2011-09-25 18:04:13 +0200}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-15164-4_5}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-15164-4_5} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/ijcai/LangTW03, Title = {Hidden Uncertainty in the Logical Representation of Desires}, Author = {J{\'e}r{\^o}me Lang and Leendert W. N. van der Torre and Emil Weydert}, Booktitle = {IJCAI}, Year = {2003}, Pages = {685-690}, Abstract = {In this paper we introduce and study a logic of desires. The semantics of our logic is defined by means of two ordering relations representing preference and normality as in Boutilier's logic QDT. However, the desires are interpreted in a different way: ``in context A, I desire B'' is interpreted as ``the best among the most normal A/\B worlds are preferred to the most normal A/\~B worlds''. We study the formal properties of these desires, illustrate their expressive power on several classes of examples and position them with respect to previous work in qualitative decision theory. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ijcai03.ps.Z}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/ijcai/2003}, Slides = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ijcai03-slides.ps.Z}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ijcai03.ps.Z} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/dagstuhl/MakinsonT07, Title = {What is Input/Output Logic? Input/Output Logic, Constraints, Permissions}, Author = {David Makinson and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Normative Multi-agent Systems}, Year = {2007}, Abstract = {We explain the {em raison d'^etre} and basic ideas of input/output logic, sketching the central elements with pointers to other publications for detailed developments. The motivation comes from the logic of norms. Unconstrained input/output operations are straightforward to define, with relatively simple behaviour, but ignore the subtleties of contrary-to-duty norms. To deal with these more sensitively, we constrain input/output operations by means of consistency conditions, expressed via the concept of an outfamily. They also provide a convenient platform for distinguishing and analysing several different kinds of permission. }, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/dagstuhl/2007P7122}, Ee = {http://drops.dagstuhl.de/opus/volltexte/2007/928}, Url = {http://drops.dagstuhl.de/opus/volltexte/2007/928} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/aiia/Nienhuys-ChengLT93, Title = {Constructing Refinement Operators by Decomposing Logical Implication}, Author = {Shan-Hwei Nienhuys-Cheng and Patrick R. J. van der Laag and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {AI*IA}, Year = {1993}, Pages = {178-189}, Abstract = {Inductive learning models (Plotkin, Shapiro) often use a search space of clauses, ordered by a generalization hierarchy. To find solutions in the model, search algorithms use different generalization and specialization operators. In this article we introduce a framework of deconstructing orderings to find refinement operators. We decompose the quasi-ordering induced by logical implication into six increasingly weak orderings. The difference between two successive orderings is small, and can therefore be understood easily. Using this decomposition, we describe upward and downward refinement operators for all orderings, including theta-subsumption and logical implication.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/aiia93.ps.Z}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/aiia/1993}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/3-540-57292-9_56}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/aiia93.ps.Z} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/kr/ParentT14, Title = {Aggregative Deontic Detachment for Normative Reasoning}, Author = {Xavier Parent and Leon van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Conference, {KR} 2014, Vienna, Austria, July 20-24, 2014}, Year = {2014}, Bibsource = {dblp computer science bibliography, http://dblp.org}, Biburl = {http://dblp.uni-trier.de/rec/bib/conf/kr/ParentT14}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/kr/2014}, Timestamp = {Thu, 31 Jul 2014 10:35:22 +0200}, Url = {http://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/KR/KR14/paper/view/7989} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/deon/ParentT14, Title = {"Sing and Dance!" - Input/Output Logics without Weakening}, Author = {Xavier Parent and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Deontic Logic and Normative Systems - 12th International Conference, {DEON} 2014, Ghent, Belgium, July 12-15, 2014. Proceedings}, Year = {2014}, Pages = {149--165}, Bibsource = {dblp computer science bibliography, http://dblp.org}, Biburl = {http://dblp.uni-trier.de/rec/bib/conf/deon/ParentT14}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/deon/2014}, Doi = {10.1007/978-3-319-08615-6_12}, Timestamp = {Tue, 07 Apr 2015 21:05:14 +0200}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08615-6_12} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/ruleml/RotoloT11, Title = {Rules, Agents and Norms: Guidelines for Rule-Based Normative Multi-Agent Systems}, Author = {Antonino Rotolo and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {RuleML Europe}, Year = {2011}, Pages = {52-66}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/ruleml/2011e}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22546-8_6}, Url = {http://www.springerlink.com/content/p012376444535410/fulltext.pdf} } @InProceedings{Rotolo2011, Title = {Rules, Agents and Norms: Guidelines for Rule-Based Normative Multi-Agent Systems}, Author = {Antonino Rotolo and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {RuleML Europe}, Year = {2011}, Pages = {52-66}, Abstract = {In this survey paper we focus on some requirements for developing normative multi-agent systems (NMAS). In particular, we discuss Boella et al.’s guidelines proposed for NMAS. Finally, we deal with two more specific questions concerning the role of norms in rule-based NMAS: the concepts of compliance and norm change. }, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/ruleml/2011e}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22546-8_6}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22546-8_6} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/deon/TanT96, Title = {How to Combine Ordering and Minimizing in a Deontic Logic Based on Preferences}, Author = {Yao-Hua Tan and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {DEON}, Year = {1996}, Pages = {216-232}, Abstract = {In this paper we propose a semantics for dyadic deontic logic with an explicit preference ordering between worlds, representing different degrees of ideality. We argue that this ideality ordering can be used in two ways to evaluate formulas, which we call ordering and minimizing. Ordering uses all preference relations between relevant worlds, whereas minimizing uses the most preferred worlds only. We show that ordering corresponds to strengthening of the antecedent, and minimizing to weakening of the consequent. Moreover, we show that in some cases ordering and minimizing have to be combined to obtain certain desirable conclusions, and that this can only be done in a so-called two-phase deontic logic. In the first phase, the preference ordering is constructed, and in the second phase the ordering is used for minimization. If these two phases are not distinguished, then counterintuitive conclusions follow. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/deon96.ps.Z}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/deon/1996}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/deon96.ps.Z} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/ecsqaru/TanT95, Title = {Why Defeasible Deontic Logic needs a Multi Preference Semantics}, Author = {Yao-Hua Tan and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {ECSQARU}, Year = {1995}, Pages = {412-419}, Abstract = {There is a fundamental difference between a conditional obligation being violated by a fact, and a conditional obligation being overridden by another conditional obligation. In this paper we propose a multi preference semantics for a defeasible deontic logic that is based on this fundamental difference. The semantics contains one preference relation for ideality, which can be used to formalize deontic `paradoxes' like the Chisholm and Forrester `Paradoxes', and another preference relation for normality, which can be used to formalize exceptions. The interference of the two preference orderings generates new questions about preferential semantics. }, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/ecsqaru/1995}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/3-540-60112-0_47}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ecsqaru95.ps.Z} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/iat/TinnemeierDMT09, Title = {Programming Normative Artifacts with Declarative Obligations and Prohibitions}, Author = {Nick A. M. Tinnemeier and Mehdi Dastani and John-Jules Ch. Meyer and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {IAT}, Year = {2009}, Pages = {145-152}, Abstract = {Normative concepts (e.g., obligations and prohibitions) are seen as a suitable tool for regulating the observable behavior of software agents. An enforcement mechanism - a process that detects when a norm is active, detects violations of the norms and handles these violations - is crucial for the practical use of norms in the construction of multi-agent systems. We propose a programming language for programming normative artifacts in terms of declarative norms referring to a state of the world (as opposed to procedural norms only referring to actions), and introduce the operational semantics of the norm enforcement mechanism.}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/iat/2009}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/WI-IAT.2009.144}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/WI-IAT.2009.144} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/dbsec/Torre12, Title = {Logics for Security and Privacy}, Author = {Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {DBSec}, Year = {2012}, Pages = {1-7}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/dbsec/2012}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31540-4_1}, Url = {http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-31540-4_1?null} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/deon/Torre10, Title = {Deontic Redundancy: A Fundamental Challenge for Deontic Logic}, Author = {Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {DEON}, Year = {2010}, Pages = {11-32}, Abstract = {To decide which norms can be removed from a system, we need to know when a norm is redundant. After shifting the focus of attention in deontic logic from detachment of obligations and permissions to deontic redundancy, I discuss in this paper five benchmark examples of deontic redundancy in reasoning about permissions, intermediate concepts and constitutive norms, deontic dilemmas, temporal deontic reasoning and contrary-to-duty reasoning. Then I discuss those benchmark examples in four formal approaches to deontic reasoning: traditional model logic, dynamic approaches, violation oriented or diagnostic systems, and imperativist or norm based approaches.}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/deon/2010}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-14183-6_4}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-14183-6_4} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/context/Torre99, Title = {Violation Contexts and Deontic Independence}, Author = {Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {CONTEXT}, Year = {1999}, Pages = {361-374}, Abstract = {In this paper we discuss the role of context and independence in normative reasoning. First, deontic operators - obligations, prohibitions, permissions - referring to the ideal context may conflict with operators referring to a violation (or contrary-to-duty) context. Second, deontic independence is a powerful concept to derive deontic operators from such operators of other violation contexts. These two concepts are used to determine how to proceed once a norm has been violated, a key issue of deontic logic applications in computer science. We also show how violation contexts and deontic independence can be used to give a new analysis of several notorious paradoxes of deontic logic. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/context99.ps.Z}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/context/1999}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/3-540-48315-2_28}, Slides = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/context99-slides.ps.Z}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/context99.ps.Z} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/ecsqaru/Torre99, Title = {Defeasible Goals}, Author = {Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {ESCQARU}, Year = {1999}, Pages = {274-385}, Abstract = {In this paper we study defeasible goals in Gabbay's labelled deductive systems. We prove the completeness of a simple and elegant proof theory for the labelled logic of defeasible goals by proving two phasing theorems. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ecsqaru99.ps.Z}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/ecsqaru/1999}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/3-540-48747-6_35}, Slides = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ecsqaru99-slides.ps.Z}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ecsqaru99.ps.Z} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/jelia/Torre98, Title = {Phased Labeled Logics of Conditional Goals}, Author = {Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {JELIA}, Year = {1998}, Pages = {92-106}, Abstract = {In this paper we introduce phased labeled logics of conditional goals. Labels are used to impose restrictions on the proof theory of the logic. The restriction discussed in this paper is that a proof rule can be blocked in a derivation due to the fact that another proof rule has been applied earlier in the derivation. We call a set of proof rules that can be applied in any order a phase in the proof theory. We propose a one-phase logic of goals containing four proof rules, and we show that it is equivalent to a four-phase logic of goals in which each phase contains exactly one proof rule. The proof theory of the four-phase logic of goals is much more efficient, because other orderings no longer have to be considered.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ld98.ps.Z}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/jelia/1998}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/3-540-49545-2_7}, Slides = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ld98-slides.ps.Z}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ld98.ps.Z} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/deon/TorreHDB04, Title = {Specifying Multiagent Organizations}, Author = {Leendert W. N. van der Torre and Joris Hulstijn and Mehdi Dastani and Jan Broersen}, Booktitle = {DEON}, Year = {2004}, Pages = {243-257}, Abstract = {In this paper we investigate the specification and verification of information systems with an organizational structure. Such systems are modelled as a normative multiagent system. To this end we use KBDIOCTL, an extension of BDICTL in which obligations and permissions are represented by directed modal operators. We illustrate how the logic can be used by introducing and discussing various properties of normative systems and individual agents which can be represented in the logic. In particular we discuss the enforcement of norms.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/deon04b.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/deon/2004}, Ee = {http://springerlink.metapress.com/openurl.asp?genre=article{\&}issn=0302-9743{\&}volume=3065{\&}spage=243}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/deon04b.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/modelage/TorreRFT97, Title = {The Role of Diagnosis and Decision Theory in Normative Reasoning}, Author = {Leendert W. N. van der Torre and Pedro Ramos and Jos{\'e} Luiz Fiadeiro and Yao-Hua Tan}, Booktitle = {ModelAge Workshop}, Year = {1997}, Pages = {216-239}, Abstract = {A theory of diagnosis and qualitative decision theory are able to formalize reasoning with norms. They are thus different from deontic logic, that formalizes reasoning about norms. In this paper, we compare two theories of diagnosis for normative systems: Ramos and Fiadeiro's theory of diagnosis developed for organizational process design and Tan and Van der Torre's theory of diagnosis extended with notions of qualitative decision theory. We observe several similarities. }, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/modelage/1997}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/3-540-46581-2_15}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/modelage97.ps.Z} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/ijcai/TorreT99, Title = {Rights, Duties and Commitments between Agents}, Author = {Leendert W. N. van der Torre and Yao-Hua Tan}, Booktitle = {IJCAI}, Year = {1999}, Pages = {1239-1246}, Abstract = {In this paper we introduce a multi agent deontic update semantics, that builds on a logic of prescriptive obligations (norms) and a logic of descriptive obligations (normative propositions). In this preference-based logic we formalize rights as a new type of strong prescriptive permissions and duties and commitments as prescriptive obligations between agents. }, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/ijcai/99}, Slides = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ijcai99-slides.ps.Z}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ijcai99.ps.Z} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/uai/TorreT99, Title = {An Update Semantics for Defeasible Obligations}, Author = {Leendert W. N. van der Torre and Yao-Hua Tan}, Booktitle = {UAI}, Year = {1999}, Pages = {631-638}, Abstract = {The deontic logic DUS is a Deontic Update Semantics for prescriptive obligations based on the update semantics of Veltman. In DUS the definition of logical validity of obligations is not based on static truth values but on dynamic action transitions. In this paper prescriptive defeasible obligations are formalized in update semantics and the diagnostic problem of defeasible deontic logic is discussed. Assume a defeasible obligation `normally A ought to be (done)' together with the fact `A is not (done).' Is this an exception of the normality claim, or is it a violation of the obligation? In this paper we formalize the heuristic principle that it is a violation, unless there is a more specific overriding obligation. The underlying motivation from legal reasoning is that criminals should have as little opportunities as possible to excuse themselves by claiming that their behavior was exceptional rather than criminal.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/uai99.ps.Z}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/uai/1999}, Ee = {http://rome.exp.sis.pitt.edu/UAI/Abstract.asp?articleID=217{\&}proceedingID=15}, Slides = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/uai99-slides.ps.Z}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/uai99.ps.Z} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/jelia/TorreT98, Title = {Prohairetic Deontic Logic (PDL)}, Author = {Leendert W. N. van der Torre and Yao-Hua Tan}, Booktitle = {JELIA}, Year = {1998}, Pages = {77-91}, Abstract = {In this paper we introduce Prohairetic Deontic Logic (PDL), a preference-based dyadic deontic logic. An obligation `$\alpha$ should be (done) if $\beta$ is (done)' is true if (1) no $\neg \alpha \wedge \beta$ state is as preferable as an $\alpha \wedge \beta$ state and (2) the preferred $\beta$ states are $\alpha$ states. We show that the different elements of this mixed representation solve different problems of deontic logic. The first part of the definition is used to formalize contrary-to-duty reasoning, that for example occurs in Chisholm's and Forrester's notorious deontic paradoxes. The second part is used to make dilemmas inconsistent. PDL shares the intuitive semantics of preference-based deontic logics without introducing additional semantic machinery such as bi-ordering semantics or ceteris paribus preferences. }, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/jelia/1998}, Date-modified = {2011-12-20 17:13:02 +0100}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/3-540-49545-2_6}, Url = {http://www.springerlink.com/content/gwactbelcpx3y2rc/} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/ki/TorreT97, Title = {Reasoning About Exceptions (Extended Abstract)}, Author = {Leendert W. N. van der Torre and Yao-Hua Tan}, Booktitle = {KI}, Year = {1997}, Pages = {405-408}, Abstract = {In this paper we analyze the conditional logic approach to default logic, the logic that formalizes reasoning about default assumptions. Conditional logic is a popular framework to formalize defeasible reasoning. The conditional sentence ldquoif beta (the antecedent or condition) then by default agr (the consequent or conclusion)rdquo is represented in this framework by the formula beta > agr, where lsquo>rsquo is some kind of implication of conditional logic. In this paper different usages of preference orderings for defeasible conditional logics are discussed. The different usages, so-called minimizing and ordering, are represented by different modal operators. Each operator validates different inference rules. Hence, the combination of different modal operators imposes restrictions on the proof theory of the logic. The restriction discussed in this paper is that a proof rule can be blocked in a derivation due to the fact that another proof rule has already been used earlier in the derivation. We call this the two-phase approach in the proof theory.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ki97full.ps.Z}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/ki/1997}, Date-modified = {2011-12-20 17:12:57 +0100}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/3540634932_38}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ki97full.ps.Z} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/modelage/TorreT97, Title = {Contextual Deontic Logic}, Author = {Leendert W. N. van der Torre and Yao-Hua Tan}, Booktitle = {ModelAge Workshop}, Year = {1997}, Pages = {240-251}, Abstract = {In this article we propose contextual deontic logic (CDL). Contextual obligations are written as O(A | B \ C), and are to be read as `A should be the case if B is the case, unless C is the case'. The unless clause is analogous to the justification in Reiter's default rules. We show how contextual obligations can be used to solve certain aspects of contrary-to-duty paradoxes of dyadic deontic logic. }, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/modelage/1997}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/3-540-46581-2_16}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/context97.ps.Z} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/comma/TorreV14, Title = {An ASPIC-based legal argumentation framework for deontic reasoning}, Author = {Leendert W. N. van der Torre and Serena Villata}, Booktitle = {Computational Models of Argument - Proceedings of {COMMA} 2014, Atholl Palace Hotel, Scottish Highlands, UK, September 9-12, 2014}, Year = {2014}, Pages = {421--432}, Bibsource = {dblp computer science bibliography, http://dblp.org}, Biburl = {http://dblp.uni-trier.de/rec/bib/conf/comma/TorreV14}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/comma/2014}, Doi = {10.3233/978-1-61499-436-7-421}, Timestamp = {Tue, 07 Apr 2015 21:05:14 +0200}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-436-7-421} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/comma/TorreV14, Title = {An ASPIC-based legal argumentation framework for deontic reasoning}, Author = {Leendert W. N. van der Torre and Serena Villata}, Booktitle = {Computational Models of Argument - Proceedings of {COMMA} 2014, Atholl Palace Hotel, Scottish Highlands, UK, September 9-12, 2014}, Year = {2014}, Pages = {421--432}, Bibsource = {dblp computer science bibliography, http://dblp.org}, Biburl = {http://dblp.uni-trier.de/rec/bib/conf/comma/TorreV14}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/comma/2014}, Doi = {10.3233/978-1-61499-436-7-421}, Timestamp = {Tue, 07 Apr 2015 21:05:14 +0200}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-436-7-421} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/deon/TosattoBTV12, Title = {Visualizing Normative Systems: An Abstract Approach}, Author = {Silvano Colombo Tosatto and Guido Boella and Leendert van der Torre and Serena Villata}, Booktitle = {DEON}, Year = {2012}, Pages = {16-30}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/deon/2012}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31570-1_2}, Url = {http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-31570-1_2} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/kr/TosattoBTV12, Title = {Abstract Normative Systems: Semantics and Proof Theory}, Author = {Silvano Colombo Tosatto and Guido Boella and Leendert van der Torre and Serena Villata}, Booktitle = {KR}, Year = {2012}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/kr/2012}, Ee = {http://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/KR/KR12/paper/view/4553}, Url = {http://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/KR/KR12/paper/view/4553} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/birthday/TurriniPTT12, Title = {Contrary-To-Duties in Games}, Author = {Paolo Turrini and Xavier Parent and Leendert van der Torre and Silvano Colombo Tosatto}, Booktitle = {Logic Programs, Norms and Action}, Year = {2012}, Pages = {329-348}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/birthday/2012sergot}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29414-3_18}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/games.pdf} } @InProceedings{Turrini2012, Title = {Contrary-To-Duties in Games}, Author = {Paolo Turrini and Xavier Parent and Leendert van der Torre and Silvano Colombo Tosatto}, Booktitle = {Logic Programs, Norms and Action}, Year = {2012}, Pages = {329-348}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/birthday/2012sergot}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29414-3_18}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/games.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/jelia/VesicT12, Title = {Beyond Maxi-Consistent Argumentation Operators}, Author = {Srdjan Vesic and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {JELIA}, Year = {2012}, Pages = {424-436}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/jelia/2012}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33353-8_33}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/jelia2012_beyondmaxi.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/ecsqaru/VillataBGT11, Title = {Arguing about the Trustworthiness of the Information Sources}, Author = {Serena Villata and Guido Boella and Dov M. Gabbay and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {ECSQARU}, Year = {2011}, Pages = {74-85}, Abstract = {Trust minimizes the uncertainty in the interactions among the information sources. To express the possibly conflicting motivations about trust and distrust, we reason about trust using argumentation theory. First, we show how to model the sources and how to attack untrustworthy sources. Second, we provide a focused representation of trust about the sources in which trust concerns not only the sources but also the information items and the relation with other information.}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/ecsqaru/2011}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22152-1_7}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22152-1_7} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/ijcai/VillataBT11, Title = {Attack Semantics for Abstract Argumentation}, Author = {Serena Villata and Guido Boella and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {IJCAI}, Year = {2011}, Pages = {406-413}, Abstract = {In this paper we conceptualize abstract argumentation in terms of successful and unsuccessful attacks, such that arguments are accepted when there are no successful attacks on them. We characterize the relation between attack semantics and Dung’s approach, and we define an SCC recursive algorithm for attack semantics using attack labelings.}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/ijcai/2011}, Ee = {http://ijcai.org/papers11/Papers/IJCAI11-076.pdf}, Url = {http://ijcai.org/papers11/Papers/IJCAI11-076.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/atal/ZhouTZ08, Title = {Partial goal satisfaction and goal change: weak and strong partial implication, logical properties, complexity}, Author = {Yi Zhou and Leendert van der Torre and Yan Zhang}, Booktitle = {AAMAS (1)}, Year = {2008}, Pages = {413-420}, Abstract = {Partial implication semantics in the context of a background theory has been introduced to formalize partial goal satisfaction in the context of beliefs. In this paper, we introduce strong partial im- plication prohibiting redundancies and weak partial implication allowing side effects, we study their semantic as well as complexity properties, and we apply the three notions of partial implication to goal change in the context of beliefs.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/aamas08.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Crossref = {DBLP:conf/atal/2008-1}, Date-modified = {2011-09-25 18:03:26 +0200}, Ee = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1402383.1402444}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/aamas08.pdf} } @Other{10993/14503, Title = {Normative Multi-Agent Systems}, Author = {Andrighetto, G. and Governatori, G. and Noriega, P. and van der Torre, L.}, Timestamp = {2015.01.26}, Year = {2012} } @Article{DBLP:journals/dagstuhl-reports/AndrighettoGNT12, Title = {Normative Multi-Agent Systems (Dagstuhl Seminar 12111)}, Author = {Giulia Andrighetto and Guido Governatori and Pablo Noriega and Leon van der Torre}, Journal = {Dagstuhl Reports}, Year = {2012}, Number = {3}, Pages = {23-49}, Volume = {2}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.4230/DagRep.2.3.23} } @Article{ABBLPT07, Title = {Integrating Architectural Models}, Author = {F. Arbab and F.S. de Boer and M. Bonsangue and M.M. Lankhorst and H.A. Proper and L. van der Torre}, Journal = {Enterprise Modelling and Information Systems Architectures}, Year = {2007}, Number = {2}, Pages = {0--57}, Volume = {1}, Abstract = {The diversity of architectural models in enterprise architecture poses a problem to their integration. Without such integration the effectiveness of these models in the process of architecting systems deminishes. In this paper we make a distinction between three classes of models. We will illustrate how the distinctions can be used for model integration within the archi- tectural approach. Symbolic models express properties of architectures of systems, semantic models interpret the symbols of semantic models, and subjective models are purposely abstracted conceptions of a domain. Building on results obtained in the ArchiMate project, we illustrate how symbolic models can be integrated using an architectural language, how integrated models can be updated using the distinction between symbolic models and their visualization, and how semantic models can be integrated using a new kind of enterprise analysis called semantic analysis. We also suggest that subjective models can be integrated using techniques from natural language analysis.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Date-modified = {2011-09-25 17:56:28 +0200}, Url = {http://www.wi-inf.uni-duisburg-essen.de/MobisPortal/index.php?lang=en&&groupId=1&&contentType=JournalMembers&issue=2&showAbstract=15} } @Article{DBLP:journals/ail/AucherBT11, Title = {A dynamic logic for privacy compliance}, Author = {Guillaume Aucher and Guido Boella and Leendert van der Torre}, Journal = {Artif. Intell. Law}, Year = {2011}, Number = {2-3}, Pages = {187-231}, Volume = {19}, Abstract = {Knowledge based privacy policies are more declarative than traditional action based ones, because they specify only what is permitted or forbidden to know, and leave the derivation of the permitted actions to a security monitor. This inference problem is already non trivial with a static privacy policy, and becomes challenging when privacy policies can change over time. We therefore introduce a dynamic modal logic that permits not only to reason about permitted and forbidden knowledge to derive the permitted actions, but also to represent explicitly the declarative privacy policies together with their dynamics. The logic can be used to check both regulatory and behavioral compliance, respectively by checking that the permissions and obligations set up by the security monitor of an organization are not in conflict with the privacy policies, and by checking that these obligations are indeed enforced. }, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Date-modified = {2011-12-21 13:26:20 +0100}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10506-011-9114-3}, Url = {http://www.springerlink.com/index/M6TL3832163628H8.pdf} } @InProceedings{BBGGMT09, Title = {A Middleware for modeling Organizations and Roles in Jade}, Author = {Matteo Baldoni and Guido Boella and Valerio Genovese and Roberto Grenna and Andrea Mugnaini and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of PROMAS}, Year = {2009}, Abstract = {Organizations and roles are often seen as mental constructs, good to be used during the design phase in Multi Agent Systems, but they have also been considered as first class citizens in MAS, when objective coordination is needed. Roles facilitate the coordination of agents inside an organization, and they give new abilities in the context of organizations, called powers, to the agents which satisfy the necessary requirements to play them. No general purpose program- ming languages for multiagent systems offer primitives to program organizations and roles as instances existing at runtime, so, in this paper, we propose our extension of the Jade framework, with Java primitives to program organizations structured in roles, and to enable agents to play roles in organizations. We provide classes and protocols which enable an agent to enact a new role in an organization, to interact with the role by invoking the execution of powers, and to receive new goals to be fulfilled. Roles and organizations can be on a different platform with respect to the role players, and communication is protocol-based. Since they can have complex behaviours, they are implemented by extending the Jade agent class. Our aim is to give to programmers a middle tier, built on the Jade platform, useful to solve with minimal implementative effort many coordination problems, and to offer a first, implicit, management of norms and sanctions.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Url = {http://www.springerlink.com/content/f2h5152282m2525h/} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/mates/BaldoniBGGT08, Title = {How to Program Organizations and Roles in the {JADE} Framework}, Author = {Matteo Baldoni and Guido Boella and Valerio Genovese and Roberto Grenna and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Multiagent System Technologies, 6th German Conference, MATES 2008, Kaiserslautern, Germany, September 23-26, 2008. Proceedings}, Year = {2008}, Editor = {Ralph Bergmann and Gabriela Lindemann and Stefan Kirn and Michal Pechoucek}, Pages = {25-36}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {5244}, Abstract = {The organization metaphor is often used in the design and imple- mentation of multiagent systems. However, few agent programming languages provide facilities to deÞne them. Several frameworks are proposed to coordinate MAS with organizations, but they are not programmable with general purpose languages. In this paper we extend the JADE framework with primitives to pro- gram in Java organizations structured in roles, and to enable agents to play roles in organizations. Roles facilitate the coordination of agents inside an organiza- tion and offer new abilities (powers) in the context of organizations to the agents which satisfy the requirements necessary to play the roles. To program organiza- tions and roles, we provide primitives which enable an agent to enact a new role in an organization to invoke powers.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/mates08.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-87805-6_4}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/mates08.pdf} } @InProceedings{BBGMGT10, Title = {A Middleware for Modelling Organizations and Roles in Jade}, Author = {Matteo Baldoni and Guido Boella and Valerio Genovese and Andrea Mugnaini and Roberto Grenna and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Post-proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Programming Multi-Agent Systems (Promas 2009)}, Year = {2010}, Abstract = {Organizations and roles are often seen as mental constructs, good to be used during the design phase in Multi Agent Systems, but they have also been considered as first class citizens in MAS, when objective coordination is needed. Roles facilitate the coordination of agents inside an organization, and they give new abilities in the context of organizations, called powers, to the agents which satisfy the necessary requirements to play them. No general purpose programming languages for multiagent systems offer primitives to program organizations and roles as instances existing at runtime, so, in this paper, we propose our extension of the Jade framework, with Java primitives to program organizations structured in roles, and to enable agents to play roles in organizations. We provide classes and protocols which enable an agent to enact a new role in an organization, to interact with the role by invoking the execution of powers, and to receive new goals to be fulfilled. Roles and organizations can be on a different platform with respect to the role players, and communication is protocol-based. Since they can have complex behaviours, they are implemented by extending the Jade agent class. Our aim is to give to programmers a middle tier, built on the Jade platform, useful to solve with minimal implementative effort many coordination problems, and to offer a first, implicit, management of norms and sanctions.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Url = {http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1928314} } @InProceedings{BBGT07, Title = {Roles in Coordination and in Agent Deliberation: A Merger of Concepts}, Author = {M. Baldoni and G. Boella and V. Genovese and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of AWESOME07}, Year = {2007}, Abstract = {In this paper we generalize and merge two models of roles used in multiagent systems which address complementary aspects: enacting roles and communication among roles in an organization or institution. We do this by proposing a metamodel of roles and specializing the metamodel to fit two existing models. We show how the two approaches can be integrated since they deal with complementary aspects: [1] focuses on roles as a way to specify interactions among agents, and, thus, it emphasizes the public character of roles. [2] focuses instead on how roles are played, and thus it emphasizes the private aspects of roles: how the beliefs and goals of the roles become the beliefs and goals of the agents. The former approach focuses on the dynamics of roles in function of the communication process. The latter approach focuses on the internal dynamics of the agents when they start playing a role or shift the role they are currently playing.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Date-modified = {2011-09-25 18:06:55 +0200}, Url = {http://publications.uni.lu/record/4326} } @InProceedings{BBT07c, Title = {Relationships Meet Their Roles in Object Oriented Programming}, Author = {Matteo Baldoni and Guido Boella and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {International Symposium on Fundamentals of Software Engineering, International Symposium, FSEN 2007, Tehran, Iran, April 17-19 2007, Proceedings}, Year = {2007}, Editor = {Farhad Arbab and Marjan Sirjani}, Pages = {440-448}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {4767}, Abstract = {In this paper we study how roles can be added to patterns modelling relationships in Object Oriented programming. Relationships can be introduced in programming languages either by reducing them to attributes of the objects which participate in the relationship, or by modelling the relationship itself as a class whose instances have the participants of the relationships among their attributes. However, even if roles have been recognized as an essential component of relationships, also in modelling languages like UML, they have not been introduced in Object Oriented programming when it is necessary to model relationships. Introducing roles allows to add attributes and behaviors to the participants in the relationship, rather than to the relationship itself, and to distinguish the natural types of the participants in the relationships from the roles the participants acquire in the relationships. We show how the role model of the language powerJava can be used to endow the relationship as attribute pattern with roles. }, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/fsem07.pdf}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/fsem07.pdf} } @InProceedings{BoeTor09b, Title = {The Interplay between Relationships, Roles and Objects}, Author = {Matteo Baldoni and Guido Boella and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of FSEN09}, Year = {2009}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {LNCS}, Abstract = {In this paper we study the interconnection between relationships and roles. We start from the patterns used to introduce relationships in object oriented languages. We show how the role model proposed in powerJava can be used to define roles in an abstract way in objects representing relationships, to specify the interconnections between the roles. Abstract roles cannot be instantiated. To participate in a relationship, objects have to extend the abstract roles of the relationship. Only when roles are implemented in the objects offering them, they can be instantiated, thus allowing another object to play those roles.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Url = {http://www.springerlink.com/content/n0688v47677j532k/} } @Article{BBT07a, Title = {Interaction between Objects in powerJava}, Author = {Matteo Baldoni and Guido Boella and Leendert van der Torre}, Journal = {Journal of Object Technology}, Year = {2007}, Number = {2}, Volume = {6}, Abstract = {In this paper we start from the consideration that high level interaction between entities like web services has very different properties with respect to the interaction between objects at the lower level of programming languages in the object oriented paradigm. In particular, web services, for security, usability and user adaptability reasons, offer different operations to different users by means of access control and keep track of the state of the interaction with each user by means of sessions. The current vision in object orientation, instead, considers attributes and operations of objects as being objective and independent from the interaction with another object, which is sessionless. To introduce these features in the interaction between objects directly in object oriented programming languages, we take inspiration from how access control is regulated by means of roles. Roles allow objects to offer different operations depending on the type of the role, of the type and identity of the player of the role, and to define session-aware interaction. We start from a definition of roles given in ontologies and knowledge representation and we discuss how this definition of roles can be introduced in Java, building our language powerJava. }, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/jot07.pdf}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/jot07.pdf} } @InProceedings{BBT07d, Title = {Adding Roles to Relationship Patterns}, Author = {M. Baldoni and G. Boella and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of WOA07}, Year = {2007}, Abstract = {In this paper we study how roles can be added to patterns modelling relationships in Object Oriented programming, and which new relationship patterns can be introduced using roles. Relationships can be introduced in programming languages either by reducing them to attributes of the objects which participate in the relationship, or by modelling the relationship itself as a class whose instances have the participants of the relationships among their attributes. However, even if roles have been recognized as an essential component of relationships, also in modelling languages like UML, they have not been introduced in Object Oriented programming when it is necessary to model relationships. Introducing roles allows to add attributes and behaviors to the participants in the relationship, rather than to the relationship itself, and to distinguish natural types as classes participating in the relationships from the roles the participants acquire in the relationships. In this paper we show how the role model proposed in powerJava can be used to endow relationships with roles, both in the relationship as attribute and in the relationship object pattern. Finally, since these patterns have different advantages and limitations, we propose a third pattern based on roles which benefits from the advantages of the two previous patterns when modelling relationships. }, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/woa07.pdf}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/woa07.pdf} } @Article{Baldoni-etal:entcs06, Title = {Roles as a Coordination Construct: Introducing {powerJava}}, Author = {M. Baldoni and G. Boella and L. van der Torre}, Journal = {Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science (ENTCS) Procs. of the First International Workshop on Methods and Tools for Coordinating Concurrent, Distributed and Mobile Systems (MTCoord 2005)}, Year = {2006}, Number = {1}, Pages = {9-29}, Volume = {150}, Abstract = {In this paper we apply the role metaphor to coordination. Roles are used in sociology as a way for structuring organizations and for coordinating their behavior. In our model, the distinguishing features of roles are their dependence on an institution, and the powers they assign to the players of roles. The institution represents an environment where the different components interact with each other by using the powers attributed to them by the roles they play, even when they do not know each other. The interaction between a component playing a role and the role is performed via precise interfaces stating the requirements to play a role, and which powers are attributed by roles. Roles encapsulate their players ' capabilities to interact with the institution and with the other roles, thus achieving separation of concerns between computation and coordination. The institution acts as a coordinator which manages the interactions among components by acting on the roles they play, thus achieving a form of exogenous coordination. As an example, we introduce the role construct in the Java programming language, providing a precompiler for it. In order to better explain the proposal, we show how to use the role construct as a coordination means by applying it to a dining philosophers problem extended with dynamic reconfiguration.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://www.di.unito.it/~guido/PS/entcs05b.pdf}, Slides = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/mtcoord05-pres.pdf}, Url = {http://www.di.unito.it/~guido/PS/entcs05b.pdf} } @InProceedings{Baldoni-etal:ksem06, Title = {Modelling the Interaction Between Objects: Roles as Affordances.}, Author = {M. Baldoni and G. Boella and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Knowledge Science, Engineering and Management, First International Conference, KSEM 2006}, Year = {2006}, Pages = {42-54}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {LNCS}, Volume = {4092}, Abstract = {In this paper we present a new vision of objects in ontologies where the objects' attributes and operations depend on who is interacting with them. This vision is based on a new definition of the notion of role, which is inspired by the concept of affordance as developed in cognitive science. The current vision of objects considers attributes and operations as being objective and independent from the interaction. In contrast, in our model interaction with an object always passes through a role played by another object manipulating it. The advantage is that roles allow to define operations whose behavior changes depending on the role and the requirements it imposes, and to define session aware interaction, where the role maintains the state of the interaction with an object. Finally, we provide a description of the model in UML and we discuss how roles as affordances have been introduced in Java. }, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ksem06.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, ISBN = {3-540-37033-1}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ksem06.pdf} } @Article{Baldoni-etal:networks06, Title = {I fondamenti ontologici dei linguaggi di programmazione orientati agli oggetti: i casi delle relazioni e dei ruoli}, Author = {M. Baldoni and G. Boella and L. van der Torre}, Journal = {Networks, rivista di filosofia dell'intelligenza artificiale e scienze cognitive}, Year = {2006}, Volume = {6}, Abstract = {In this paper we consider the ontology behind Object Oriented programming languages. We show that two conceptual primitives are missing: relations and roles. We simulate relations in a programming language by means of objects. To introduce roles we provide an ontological definition of roles and use it to extend the Java language. Sommario. In questo articolo esaminiamo l'ontologia sottostante i linguaggi di programmazione orientati agli oggetti. Mostriamo che due primitive concettuali mancano all'appello: le relazioni e i ruoli. Introduciamo le relazioni simulandole per mezzo di oggetti. Per introdurre i ruoli partiamo da una definizione ontologica di ruolo e la utilizziamo per estendere il linguaggio Java.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Url = {http://www.di.unito.it/~guido/PS/baldoni-networks07.pdf} } @InProceedings{Baldoni-etal:pppj06, Title = {Interaction among objects via roles: sessions and affordances in {Java}}, Author = {M. Baldoni and G. Boella and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Procs. of Principles and Practice of Programming in Java (PPPJ'06)}, Year = {2006}, Address = {New York (NY)}, Pages = {188--193}, Publisher = {ACM}, Abstract = {In this paper we present a new vision in object oriented programming languages where the objects' attributes and operations depend on who is interacting with them. This vision is based on a new definition of the notion of role, which is inspired to the concept of affordance as developed in cognitive science. The current vision of objects considers attributes and operations as being objective and independent from the interaction. In contrast, in our model interaction with an object always passes through a role played by another object manipulating it. The advantage is that roles allow to define operations whose behavior changes depending on the role and the requirements it imposes, and to define session aware interaction, where the role maintains the state of the interaction with an object. Finally, we discuss how roles as affordances can be introduced in Java, building on our language powerJava. }, Affiliation = {icr}, File = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/pppj06.pdf}, Slides = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/pppj06.ppt}, Url = {http://dl.acm.org/authorize?837460} } @InProceedings{Baldoni-etal:sac06, Title = {{powerJava}: ontologically founded roles in object oriented programming language}, Author = {M. Baldoni and G. Boella and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Procs. of ACM Symposium on Applied Computing (SAC'06), Track Object Oriented Programming Languages and Systems (OOPS'06)}, Year = {2006}, Address = {New York (NJ)}, Pages = {1414-1418}, Publisher = {ACM}, Abstract = {In this paper we introduce a new view on roles in Object Oriented programming languages, based on an ontological analysis of roles. A role is always associated with an object instance playing the role and also to an object instance (its institution) which represents its context. The de nition of a role depends on the de nition of the institution. This property allows to endow role-players with powers that can modify the state of the institution and of the other roles de ned in it. As an example, we introduce a role construct in Java, where the abolve features are interpreted as follows. Roles are implemented as classes, which can be instantiated only in presence of an instance of the player and of an instance of an institution. The de nition of a class implementing a role is included in the class of the institution, the role belongs to. Powers are methods which can access private elds and methods of the institution they belong to, and of the other roles of the same institution.}, Affiliation = {icr}, File = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/sac06.pdf}, Url = {http://dl.acm.org/authorize?817547} } @Article{Boella-etal:MTcoord05, Title = {Roles as a Coordination Construct: Introducing powerJava}, Author = {M. Baldoni and G. Boella and L. van der Torre}, Journal = {Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science (ENTCS) Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Methods and Tools for Coordinating Concurrent, Distributed and Mobile Systems (MTCoord 2005)}, Year = {2006}, Number = {1}, Pages = {9-29}, Volume = {150}, Abstract = {In this paper we apply the role metaphor to coordination. Roles are used in sociology as a way to structure organizations and to coordinate their behavior. In our model, the features of roles are their dependence on an institution, and the powers they assign to players of roles. The institution represents an environment where the components interact with each other by using the powers attributed to them by the roles they play, even when they do not know each other. The interaction between a component playing a role and the role is performed via interfaces stating the requirements to play a role, and which powers are attributed by roles. Roles encapsulate their players' capabilities to interact with the institution and with the other roles, thus achieving separation of concerns between computation and coordination. The institution acts as a coordinator which manages the interactions among components by acting on the roles they play, thus achieving a form of exogenous coordination. As an example, we introduce the role construct in the Java programming language, providing a precompiler for it. In order to better explain the proposal, we show how to use the role construct as a coordination means by applying it to a dining philosophers problem extended with dynamic reconffiguration.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/entcs05b.pdf}, Date-modified = {2011-12-20 17:14:51 +0100}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/entcs05b.pdf} } @InProceedings{Boella-etal:promas05, Title = {Bridging Agent Theory and Object Orientation: Importing Social Roles in Object Oriented Languages}, Author = {M. Baldoni and G. Boella and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Programming Multi-Agent Systems, Third International Workshop, ProMAS 2005}, Year = {2006}, Address = {Berlin}, Pages = {57-75}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {LNCS}, Volume = {3862}, Abstract = {Social roles structure social institutions like organizations in Multi-Agent Systems (MAS). In this paper we describe how to introduce the notion of social role in programming languages. To avoid the commitment to a particular agent model, architecture or language, we decided to extend Java, the most prominent object oriented programming language, by adding social roles. The obtained language allows an easier implementation of MAS's w.r.t. the Java language. We also show that many important properties of social roles, studied in the MAS field, can be applied to objects. Two are the essential features of social roles according to an analysis reported in the paper: social roles are defined by other entities (called institutions), and when an agent plays a role it is endowed with powers by the institution that defines it. We interpret these two features into the object oriented paradigm as the fact that social roles are objects, which are defined in and exist only inside other objects (corresponding to institutions), and that, through a role, external objects playing the role can access to the object (institution) the role belongs to.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Url = {http://www.springerlink.com/content/w3v41078976x467l/} } @InProceedings{Torre05IntroducingOntologically, Title = {Introducing Ontologically Founded Roles in Object Oriented Programming: powerJava}, Author = {Baldoni, M. and Boella, G. and van der Torre, L.}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of ROLES05}, Year = {2005}, Abstract = {In this paper we introduce a new view on roles in Object Oriented programming languages. Our notion is based on an ontological analysis of social roles and attributes to roles the following properties: first, a role is always associated not only to an object instance playing the role, but also to another object instance which constitutes the context of the role and which we call institution. Second, the definition of a role depends on the definition of the institution which constitutes its context. Third, this second property allows to endow players of roles with powers to modify the state of the institution and of the other roles of the same institution. As an example of this model of roles in Object Oriented programming languages, we introduce a role construct in Java.}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/roles05.pdf} } @InProceedings{BBT07b, Title = {Bridging Agent Theory and Object Orientation: Agent-Like Communication Among Objects}, Author = {Matteo Baldoni and Guido Boella and Leendert W.N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Programming Multi-Agent Systems, 4th International Workshop, ProMAS 2006, Hakodate, Japan, May 9, 2006, Revised and Invited Papers}, Year = {2007}, Editor = {Rafael H. Bordini and Mehdi Dastani and J{\"{o}}rgen Dix and Amal El Fallah-Seghrouchni}, Pages = {149-164}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {4411}, Abstract = {This paper begins with the comparison of the message-sending mechanism, for communication among agents, and the method-invocation mechanism, for communication among objects. Then, we describe an extension of the methodinvocation mechanism by introducing the notion of ``sender'' of a message, ``state'' of the interaction and ``protocol'' using the notion of ``role'', as it has been introduced in the powerJava extension of Java. The use of roles in communication is shown by means of an example of protocol.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/promas06.pdf}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/promas06.pdf} } @InProceedings{Bar:ICEC08, Title = {E-business Outsourcing: a New Approach combining Information Rights Technologies and Agent-Based Theory on Norms}, Author = {Patrizio Barbini and Guido Boella and Pier-Carlo Rossi and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the International Conference on Electronic Commerce in the 21th Century (ECIC-2008)}, Year = {2008}, Pages = {93--96}, Publisher = {Central Department of Computer Science and Information Technology, Institute of Science and Technology, Tribhuvan University}, Abstract = {-}, Affiliation = {icr}, Date-modified = {2011-09-25 17:48:11 +0200}, Url = {http://publications.uni.lu/record/1996} } @Article{10993/19625, Title = {On the Input/Output behavior of argumentation frameworks}, Author = {Baroni, P. and Boella, G. and Cerutti, F. and Giacomin, M. and van der Torre, L.}, Year = {2014}, Publisher = {Elsevier Science}, Timestamp = {2015.01.26} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/prima/BoellaBT08, Title = {Reasoning about Constitutive Norms, Counts-As Conditionals, Institutions, Deadlines and Violations}, Author = {Guido Boella and Jan Broersen and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Intelligent Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 11th Pacific Rim International Conference on Multi-Agents, PRIMA 2008, Hanoi, Vietnam, December 15-16, 2008. Proceedings}, Year = {2008}, Editor = {The Duy Bui and Tuong Vinh Ho and Quang-Thuy Ha}, Pages = {86-97}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {5357}, Abstract = {Reasoning about norms and time is of central concern to the regulation or control of the behavior of a multi-agent system. In earlier work we introduce a representation of normative systems that distinguishes between norms and the detached obligations of agents over time. In this paper we consider constitutive norms and the detached counts-as conditionals and institutional facts in this framework, we introduce deadlines in the regulative norms, and we consider the corresponding role of violations. We focus on the reasoning tasks to determine whether a constitutive or regulative norm is redundant in a normative system and whether two normative systems are equivalent. We distinguish counts-as equivalence, institutional equivalence, obligation equivalence and violation equivalence, depending on whether we are interested in all normative consequences, or only a subset of them. For the various notions of equivalence, we give sound and complete characterizations.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Date-modified = {2011-09-25 18:06:07 +0200}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-89674-6_12}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-89674-6_12} } @InProceedings{BBTV09b, Title = {Representing Excuses in Social Dependence Networks}, Author = {Guido Boella and Jan Broersen and Leendert van der Torre and Serena Villata}, Booktitle = {AI*IA}, Year = {2009}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {LNCS}, Abstract = {In this paper, we propose a representation of excuses in the context of multiagent systems. We distinguish five classes of excuses, taking as start- ing point both jurisprudential and philosophical studies about this topic, and we discuss their acceptance criteria. We highlight the following classes of excuses: epistemic excuses, power-based excuses, norm-based excuses, counts as-based excuses and social-based excuses and we represent them using social dependence networks. The acceptance criteria individuate those excuses which success in maintaining the trust of the other agents, e.g. in the context of social networks, excuses based on norms seem better than counts as-based ones in achieving this aim.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Url = {http://www.springerlink.com/content/56615766217528n0/} } @Article{CaiBT09, Title = {Norm Negotiation in Online Multi-Player Games}, Author = {Guido Boella and Patrice Caire and Leendert van der Torre}, Journal = {Knowledge Information System Journal}, Year = {2009}, Number = {2}, Pages = {137-156}, Volume = {18}, Abstract = {In this paper, we introduce an agent communication protocol and speech acts for norm negotiation. The protocol creates individual or contractual obligations to fulfill goals of the agents based on the so-called social delegation cycle. First, agents communicate their individual goals and powers. Second, they propose social goals which can be accepted or rejected by other agents. Third, they propose obligations and sanctions to achieve the social goal, which can again be accepted or rejected. Finally, the agents accept the new norm by indicating which of their communicated individual goals the norm achieves. The semantics of the speech acts is based on a commitment to public mental attitudes. The norm negotiation model is illustrated by an example of norm negotiation in multi-player online gaming.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/pubs/cai08b.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Date-modified = {2011-09-25 17:57:47 +0200}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10115-008-0162-2}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/pubs/cai08b.pdf} } @Article{10993/8883, Title = {Dependence Networks for Agreement Technologies}, Author = {Boella, G. and Caire, P. and van der Torre, L. and Villata, S.}, Year = {2012}, Publisher = {CEUR}, Timestamp = {2015.01.26} } @Other{10993/15383, Title = {NLP Challenges for Eunomos, a Tool to Build and Manage Legal Knowledge}, Abstract = {In this paper, we describe how NLP can semi-automate the construction and analysis of knowledge in Eunomos, a legal knowledge management service which enables users to view legislation from various sources and ?nd the right de?nitions and explanations of legal concepts in a given context. NLP can semi-automate some routine tasks currently performed by knowledge engineers, such as classifying norms, or linking key terms within legislation to ontological concepts. This helps overcome the resource bottleneck problem of creating specialist knowledge management systems. While accuracy is of the utmost importance in the legal domain, and the information should be veri?ed by domain experts as a matter of course, a semi-automated approach can result in considerable ef?ciency gains.}, Author = {Boella, G. and di Caro, L. and Humphreys, L. and Robaldo, L. and van der Torre, L.}, Publisher = {European Language Resources Association (ELRA)}, Timestamp = {2015.01.26}, Url = {http://www.lrec-conf.org/proceedings/lrec2012/pdf/1035\_Paper.pdf}, Year = {2012} } @InProceedings{BPPTT07a, Title = {What You should Believe}, Author = {Guido Boella and Celia da Costa Pereira and Gabriella Pigozzi and Andrea Tettamanzi and and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of The 19th Belgian-Dutch Conference on Artificial Intelligence (BNAIC 2007)}, Year = {2007}, Editor = {Mehdi Dastani and Edwin de Jong}, Abstract = {This paper presents and discusses a novel approach to indeterministic belief revision. An indeterministic belief revision operator assumes that, when an agent is confronted with a new piece of information, it can revise its belief base in more than one way. We define a rational agent not only in terms of what it believes, as often assumed in belief revision, but also of what it ought or is obliged to do. Hence, we propose that the agent's goals play a role in the choice of (possibly) one of the several available revision options. Properties of the new belief revision mechanism are also investigated.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/dkb07.pdf}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/dkb07.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/ifip12/BoellaPTT08, Title = {Making Others Believe What They Want}, Author = {Guido Boella and C{\'{e}}lia da Costa Pereira and Andrea Tettamanzi and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Artificial Intelligence in Theory and Practice II, IFIP 20th World Computer Congress, TC 12: IFIP AI 2008 Stream, September 7-10, 2008, Milano, Italy}, Year = {2008}, Editor = {Max Bramer}, Pages = {215-224}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {IFIP}, Volume = {276}, Abstract = {We study the interplay between argumentation and belief revision within the MAS framework. When an agent uses an argument to persuade another one, he must consider not only the proposition supported by the argument, but also the overall impact of the argument on the beliefs of the addressee. Different arguments lead to different belief revisions by the addressee. We propose an approach whereby the best argument is defined as the one which is both rational and the most appealing to the addressee. }, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-09695-7_21}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-09695-7_21}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-09695-7_21} } @Article{DBLP:journals/igpl/BoellaPPTT10, Title = {The role of goals in belief selection}, Author = {Guido Boella and C{\'e}lia da Costa Pereira and Gabriella Pigozzi and Andrea Tettamanzi and Leendert van der Torre}, Journal = {Logic Journal of the IGPL}, Year = {2010}, Number = {4}, Pages = {559-578}, Volume = {18}, Abstract = {In this paper we consider the relation between beliefs and goals in agent theory. Beliefs play three roles in reasoning about goals: they play a role in the generation of unconditional desires from condi- tional ones, they play a role in adoption of desires as goals, and they play a role in the selection of plans to achieve goals. In this paper we consider the role of goals in reasoning about beliefs. Though we assume that goals do not play a role in the belief generation problem, we argue that they play a role in the belief selection problem. We show the rationality of the use of goals in belief selection, in the sense that there are cases in which agents that take their goals into account in selecting a belief set from a set of alternatives outperform agents that do not do so. We also formally distinguish between the rational role of goals in belief selection and irrational wishful thinking.}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jigpal/jzp038}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jigpal/jzp038} } @InProceedings{Boella:DKB07, Title = {What You Should Believe: Obligations and Beliefs}, Author = {G. Boella and C. da Costa Periera and G. Pigozzi and A. Tettamanzi and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of KI07-Workshop on Dynamics of Knowledge and Belief}, Year = {2007}, Abstract = {This paper presents and discusses a novel approach to indeterministic belief revision. An indeterministic belief revision operator assumes that, when an agent is confronted with a new piece of information, it can revise its belief base in more than one way. We define a rational agent not only in terms of what it believes, as often assumed in belief revision, but also of what it ought or is obliged to do. Hence, we propose that the agent's goals play a role in the choice of (possibly) one of the several available revision options. Properties of the new belief revision mechanism are also investigated.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/dkb07.pdf}, Date-modified = {2011-12-20 17:48:38 +0100}, Keywords = {wks}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/dkb07.pdf} } @Article{BDHT07a, Title = {A Common Ontology of Agent Communication Languages: Modeling Mental Attitudes and Social Commitments using Roles}, Author = {G. Boella and R. Damiano and J. Hulstijn and L. van der Torre}, Journal = {Applied Ontology}, Year = {2007}, Pages = {217-265}, Volume = {2}, Abstract = {There are two main traditions in defining a semantics for agent communication languages, based either on mental attitudes or on social commitments. These traditions share speech acts as operators with preconditions and effects, and agents playing roles like speaker and hearer, but otherwise they rely on distinct ontologies. They refer not only to either belief and intention or various notions of social commitment, but also to distinct speech acts and distinct kinds of dialogue. In this paper, we propose a common ontology for both approaches based on public mental attitudes attributed to role instances. Public mental attitudes avoid the unverifiability problem of private mental states, while reusing the logics and implementations developed for FIPA compliant approaches. Moreover, a common ontology of communication primitives allows for the construction of agents which do not need separate reasoning modules to participate in dialogues with both mental attitudes and social commitments compliant agents. Moreover, a common ontology of communication primitives allows for the construction of agents participating in and combining the full range of dialogues covered by the individual approaches without having to redefine the existing protocols to cope with new dialog types. We illustrate how to extend the ontology to a semantics for agent communication and how to define mappings from existing semantics to the new one. }, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ao07b.pdf}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ao07b.pdf} } @InProceedings{BDHT07b, Title = {Distinguishing Propositional and Action Commitment in Agent Communication}, Author = {G. Boella and R. Damiano and J. Hulstijn and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of CMNA'07}, Year = {2007}, Abstract = {Our goal is to extend agent communication languages for persuasion dialogues. We distinguish action commitments from propositional commitments, because both limit future moves, but an action commitment is fulfilled when the hearer believes that the action is performed, whereas a propositional commitment is fulfilled only when the hearer concedes to the proposition - where concessions are the absence of a belief to the contrary, and prevent further challenges. Using a common model for both kind of commitments and a role-based semantics of agent communication languages, we show how propositional commitments are related to public beliefs and action commitments to public goals. }, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/cmna06.pdf}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/cmna06.pdf} } @Article{DBLP:journals/ao/BoellaDHT07, Title = {A common ontology of agent communication languages: Modeling mental attitudes and social commitments using roles}, Author = {Guido Boella and Rossana Damiano and Joris Hulstijn and Leendert van der Torre}, Journal = {Applied Ontology}, Year = {2007}, Number = {3-4}, Pages = {217-265}, Volume = {2}, Abstract = {There are two main traditions in defining a semantics for agent communication languages, based either on mental attitudes or on social commitments. These traditions share speech acts as operators with preconditions and effects, and agents playing roles like speaker and hearer, but otherwise they rely on distinct ontologies. They refer not only to either belief and intention or various notions of social commitment, but also to distinct speech acts and distinct kinds of dialogue. In this paper, we propose a common ontology for both approaches based on public mental attitudes attributed to role instances. Public mental attitudes avoid the unverifiability problem of private mental states, while reusing the logics and implementations developed for FIPA compliant approaches. Moreover, a common ontology of communication primitives allows for the construction of agents which do not need separate reasoning modules to participate in dialogues with both mental attitudes and social commitments compliant agents. Moreover, a common ontology of communication primitives allows for the construction of agents participating in and combining the full range of dialogues covered by the individual approaches without having to redefine the existing protocols to cope with new dialog types. We illustrate how to extend the ontology to a semantics for agent communication and how to define mappings from existing semantics to the new one.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ao07b.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Ee = {http://iospress.metapress.com/content/v760u6332r14k40n/}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ao07b.pdf} } @InCollection{Boella-etal:aamas06b, Title = {Role-Based Semantics for Agent Communication: Embedding of the `Mental Attitudes' and `Social Commitments' Semantics}, Author = {Boella, G. and Damiano, R. and Hulstijn, J. and van der Torre, L.}, Booktitle = {Procs. of the 5th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS'06)}, Publisher = {ACM}, Year = {2006}, Address = {New York (NJ)}, Pages = {688-690}, Abstract = {In this paper we illustrate how a role-based semantics for agent communication languages can embed the two main existing models of agent communication languages, respectively based on mental attitudes and social commitments semantics. These two models have been presented as incompatible approaches, but recently we illustrated for persuasion dialogues and using our normative multiagent systems framework, that they can be seen also as complimentary ones. Independently from our own multi-agent model, in this paper we illustrate for the speech act inform how the role based semantics embeds the other two semantics. }, Affiliation = {icr}, File = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/aamas06b.pdf}, Url = {http://dl.acm.org/authorize?820505} } @InProceedings{Boella-etal:ac06, Title = {{ACL} Semantics between Social Commitments and Mental Attitudes}, Author = {G. Boella and R. Damiano and J. Hulstijn and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {International Workshops on Agent Communication, AC 2005 and AC 2006}, Year = {2006}, Address = {Berlin}, Pages = {30-44}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {LNAI}, Volume = {3859}, Abstract = {There are two main traditions in defining a semantics for agent communication languages, based either on mental attitudes or on social commitments. In this paper, we translate both traditions in a different approach in which the dialogue state is represented by the beliefs and goals publicly attributed to the roles played by the dialogue participants. On the one hand, this approach avoids the problems of mentalistic semantics, such as the unverifiability of private mental states. On the other hand, it can be applied also to cooperative situations that can be modelled by using a weaker notion than commitment.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ac06.pdf}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ac06.pdf} } @Article{GabBGT09, Title = {Fibred Security Language}, Author = {Guido Boella and Dov Gabbay and Valerio Genovese and Leendert van der Torre}, Journal = {Studia Logica}, Year = {2009}, Number = {3}, Pages = {395-436}, Volume = {92}, Abstract = {We study access control policies based on the says operator by introducing a logical framework called Fibred Security Language (FSL) which is able to deal with features like joint responsibility between sets of principals and to identify them by means of first-order formulas. FSL is based on a multimodal logic methodology. We first discuss the main contributions from the expressiveness point of view, we give semantics for the language both for classical and intuitionistic fragment), we then prove that in order to express well-known properties like `speaks-for or `hand-off', defined in terms of says, we do not need second-order logic (unlike previous approaches) but a decidable fragment of first-order logic suffices. We propose a model-driven study of the says axiomatization by constraining the Kripke models in order to respect desirable security properties, we study how existing access control logics can be translated into FSL and we give completeness for the logic.}, Affiliation = {icr,SnT}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://www.springerlink.com/openurl.asp?genre=article&id=doi:10.1007/s11225-009-9201-6}, Url = {http://www.springerlink.com/openurl.asp?genre=article&id=doi:10.1007/s11225-009-9201-6} } @InProceedings{BGTV10b, Title = {Support in Abstract Argumentation}, Author = {Guido Boella and Dov M. Gabbay and Leendert van der Torre and Serena Villata}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Computational Models of Argument (COMMA'10)}, Year = {2010}, Pages = {40-51}, Publisher = {Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, IOS Press}, Abstract = {In this paper, we consider two drawbacks of Cayrol and Lagasque-Schiex's meta-argumentation theory to model bipolar argumentation frameworks. We consider first the ``lost of admissibility'' in Dung's sense and second, the definition of notions of attack in the context of a support relation. We show how to prevent these drawbacks by introducing support meta-arguments. Like the model of Cayrol and Lagasque-Schiex, our formalization confirms the use of meta-argumentation to reuse Dung's properties. We do not take a stance towards the usefulness of a support relation among arguments, though we show that if one would like to introduce them, it can be done without extending Dung's theory. Finally, we show how to use meta-argumentation to instantiate an argumentation framework to represent defeasible support. In this model of support, the support relation itself can be attacked.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Url = {http://www.booksonline.iospress.nl/Content/View.aspx?piid=18252} } @Article{DBLP:journals/sLogica/BoellaGTV09, Title = {Meta-Argumentation Modelling {I}: Methodology and Techniques}, Author = {Guido Boella and Dov M. Gabbay and Leendert van der Torre and Serena Villata}, Journal = {Studia Logica}, Year = {2009}, Number = {2-3}, Pages = {297-355}, Volume = {93}, Abstract = {In this paper, we introduce the methodology and techniques of meta-argumentation to model argumentation. The methodology of meta-argumentation instantiates Dung's abstract argumentation theory with an extended argumentation theory, and is thus based on a combination of the methodology of instantiating abstract arguments, and the methodology of extending Dung's basic argumentation frameworks with other relations among abstract arguments. The technique of meta-argumentation applies Dung's theory of abstract argumentation to itself, by instantiating Dung's abstract arguments with meta-arguments using a technique called flattening. We characterize the domain of instantiation using a representation technique based on soundness and completeness. Finally, we distinguish among various instantiations using the technique of specification languages.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Date-modified = {2011-09-25 17:57:12 +0200}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11225-009-9213-2}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11225-009-9213-2} } @InProceedings{BGGT09, Title = {A Multimodal view on Access Control and Trust Management: Fibred Security Language}, Author = {Guido Boella and Valerio Genovese and Dov Gabbay and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of STM09}, Year = {2009}, Abstract = {We study access control policies based on the says operator by introducing a logical framework called Fibred Security Language (FSL) which is able to deal with features like joint responsibility between sets of principals and to identify them by means of first-order formulas. FSL is based on a multimodal logic methodology. We first discuss the main contributions from the expressiveness point of view, we give semantics for the language (both for classical and intuitionistic fragment), we then prove that in order to express well-known properties like `speaks-for' or `hand-off', defined in terms of says, we do not need second-order logic (unlike previous approaches) but a decidable fragment of first-order logic suffices. Finally we propose a model- driven study of the says axiomatization by constraining the Kripke models in order to respect desirable security properties.}, Affiliation = {icr,SnT}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/FSL-STM.pdf} } @InProceedings{BGGT07, Title = {Merging Roles in Coordination and in Agent Deliberation}, Author = {Guido Boella and Valerio Genovese and Roberto Grenna and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {PRIMA}, Year = {2007}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Abstract = {In this paper we generalize and merge two models of roles used in multiagent systems which address complementary aspects: enacting roles and communication among roles in an organization or institution. We do this by proposing a metamodel of roles and specializing the metamodel to two existing models. We show how the two approaches can be integrated since they deal with complementary aspects: Boella [1] focuses on roles as a way to specify interactions among agents, and, thus, it emphasizes the public character of roles. [2] focuses instead on how roles are played, and thus it emphasizes the private aspects of roles: how the beliefs and goals of the roles become the beliefs and goals of the agents. The former approach focuses on the dynamics of roles in function of the communication process. The latter focuses on agents internal dynamics when they start playing a role or shift the role they are currently playing.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Url = {http://www.springerlink.com/content/b6387124428247k4/} } @InProceedings{BGTV09, Title = {Checking Consistency in role oriented Dependence Networks}, Author = {Guido Boella and Valerio Genovese and Leendert van der Torre and Serena Villata}, Booktitle = {BNAIC 2009: 21th Belgian - Netherlands Conference on Artificial Intelligence}, Year = {2009}, Pages = {27-34}, Abstract = {In this paper we first formalize dependence networks that can be automatically build to model goal-based relationships among agents. Then, we propose three algorithms to build and check the consistency of a dependence network. We start presenting the elements composing our ontology such as agents, goals, skills, dependencies with the addition of the institutional notions of roles, institutional goals, institutional skills. We investigate the reasons behind the possible inconsistencies in building the combined dependence network and we propose an algorithm to check them.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Url = {http://wwwis.win.tue.nl/bnaic2009/papers/bnaic2009_paper_77.pdf} } @Article{DBLP:journals/japll/BoellaGHRRT11, Title = {Time and defeasibility in FIPA ACL semantics}, Author = {Guido Boella and Guido Governatori and Joris Hulstijn and R{\'e}gis Riveret and Antonino Rotolo and Leendert van der Torre}, Journal = {J. Applied Logic}, Year = {2011}, Number = {4}, Pages = {274-288}, Volume = {9}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jal.2011.09.006}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/timeanddefeasibility.pdf} } @InProceedings{BHGRRT07, Title = {{FIPA} Communicative Acts in Defeasible Logic}, Author = {G. Boella and J. Hulstijn and G. Governatori and R. Riveret and A. Rotolo and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of NRAC'07}, Year = {2007}, Abstract = {In agent communication languages, the inferences that can be made on the basis of a communicative action are inherently conditional, and non-monotonic. For example, a proposal only leads to a commitment, on the condition that it is accepted. And in a persuasion dialogue, assertions may later be retracted. In this paper we therefore present a defeasible logic that can be used to express a semantics for agent communication languages, and to efficiently make inferences on the basis of communicative actions. The logic is non-monotonic, allows nested rules and mental attitudes as the content of communicative actions, and has an explicit way of expressing persistence over time. Moreover, it expresses that mental attitudes are publicly attributed to agents playing roles in the dialogue. To illustrate the usefulness of the logic, we reformalize the meta-theory underlying the FIPA semantics for agent communication, focusing on inform and propose. We show how composed speech acts can be formalized, and extend the semantics with an account of persuasion.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/nrac07.pdf}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/nrac07.pdf} } @InProceedings{Boella-etal:anirem05, Title = {Modeling Control Mechanisms with Normative Multiagent Systems: The Case of the Renewables Obligation}, Author = {G. Boella and J. Hulstijn and Y. Tan and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Coordination, Organizations, Institutions, and Norms in Multi-Agent Systems AAMAS 2005 International Workshops on Agents, Norms, and Institutions for Regulated Multiagent Systems, ANIREM 2005 and on Organizations in Multi-Agent Systems, OOOP 2005}, Year = {2006}, Address = {Berlin}, Pages = {114-126}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {LNAI}, Volume = {3913}, Abstract = {This paper is about control mechanisms for virtual organizations. As a case study, we discuss the Renewables Obligation (RO), a control mechanism that was introduced in the United Kingdom to stimulate the production of renewable energy. We apply a conceptual model based on normative multiagent systems (NMAS). We propose to model both the participants and the normative system as autonomous agents, having beliefs and goals. Norms, which can be internalized by the agents as obligations, are translated into conditional beliefs and goals of the normative system, which concern both detection and sanctioning measures. We show that the model can handle both the regulative and the evidential aspects of the case.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Url = {http://www.springerlink.com/content/kj2017uj02421741/} } @InProceedings{boella2005transaction, Title = {Transaction trust in normative multiagent systems}, Author = {Boella, G. and Hulstijn, J. and Tan, Y.H. and Van Der Torre, L. and others}, Booktitle = {Procs. of Trust in Agent Societies Workshop at AAMAS'05}, Year = {2005}, Abstract = {In this paper we apply Boella and van der Torre's normative multiagent systems to analyze a model of transaction trust introduced by Tan and colleagues. We discuss the role of constitutive and regulative norms in party trust and control trust. Moreover, we use so called contract negotiation games to indicate when controls are needed. Though sometimes regulators focus exclusively on adding controls, a scenario analysis can be used to show when this is not needed. We illustrate these issues of transaction trust by a case study from international trade, namely the Letter of Credit procedure. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/trust05.pdf}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/trust05.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/argmas/BoellaHT05, Title = {A Logic of Abstract Argumentation.}, Author = {G. Boella and J. Hulstijn and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems, Second International Workshop, ArgMAS 2005, Utrecht, The Netherlands, July 26, 2005, Revised Selected and Invited Papers}, Year = {2006}, Editor = {S. Parsons and N. Maudet and P. Moraitis and I. Rahwan}, Pages = {29-41}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {4049}, Abstract = {In this paper we introduce a logic of abstract argumentation capturing Dung's theory of abstract argumentation, based on connectives for attack and defend. We extend it to a modal logic of abstract argumentation to generalize Dung's theory and define variants of it. Moreover, we use the logic to relate Dung's theory of abstract argumentation to more traditional conditional and comparative formalisms, and we illustrate how to reason about arguments in meta-argumentation.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/argmas05.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/11794578_2}, ISBN = {3-540-36355-6}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/argmas05.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/atal/BoellaHT09, Title = {Social network semantics for agent communication}, Author = {Guido Boella and Joris Hulstijn and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {8th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2009), Budapest, Hungary, May 10-15, 2009, Volume 2}, Year = {2009}, Editor = {Carles Sierra and Cristiano Castelfranchi and Keith S. Decker and Jaime Sim{\~a}o Sichman}, Pages = {1215-1216}, Publisher = {IFAAMAS}, Abstract = {In this paper we introduce a semantics for agent communication languages based on social networks, providing us with a principled way to define and reason about their dynamics. As an instance we consider dependence networks, where the social relations represent that an agent depends on another agent to achieve its intentions. We suggest how FIPA semantics can be reconstructed in this social semantics. Our approach reveals that we need special semantics for relations like ownership, authority or fear: all kinds of interesting social relations, not previously studied by multiagent systems.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Ee = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1558109.1558219}, ISBN = {978-0-9817381-7-8}, Url = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1558109.1558219} } @InProceedings{Boella-etal:iat06, Title = {The Roles of Roles in Agent Communication Languages}, Author = {G. Boella and J. Hulstijn and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Procs. of the IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Intelligent Agent Technology (IAT'06)}, Year = {2006}, Pages = {381-384}, Publisher = {IEEE}, Abstract = {We consider agents having multiple communication sessions at the same time. We assume that FIPA semantics of agent communication languages can still be used when we attribute mental attitudes for each session, which we call the roles of the agents, and we assume that we have to distinguish the mental attitudes attributed to the roles from the mental attitudes of the agents. We consider several consequences of the distinction between the mental attitudes attributed to the roles and the mental attitudes attributed to the agent. First, in attributing mental attitudes to an agent or to one of its roles, we argue that only mental attributes are attributed to an agent's role when these attributes follow directly from the agent's communication. They are therefore public in the sense that every agent who has overheard the session, has the same beliefs about the mental attitudes of the role. Second, the moves permitted to the dialogue participants in the same dialogue game are based on the role only, such that different kind of moves can be specified in different types of dialogue games. Obligations are associated to roles related to institutions which can enforce them by means of sanctions. Third, expectations are based both on the mental attitudes ascribed to the agent and to the role. }, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/iat06.pdf}, Location = {Hong Kong}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/iat06.pdf} } @InProceedings{Boella-etal:commonsense05, Title = {Decision-Theoretic Deliberation in Resource Bounded Self-Aware Agents}, Author = {G. Boella and J. Hulstijn and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Procs. of Commonsense'05}, Year = {2005}, Abstract = {Agent theory proposes to model the behavior of complex software systems in terms of mental attitudes like belief, desires, goals, intentions and obligations, ranging from, e.g., the PRS system [7] to the more recent BOID architecture [3]. Decision-theoretic deliberation captures concepts and reasoning mechanisms from agent theory in standard decision-theoretic terms. This is an ambitious enterprise, as it has the objective to bridge the worlds of decision theory and agent theory. Thus far, several partial results on the decision-theoretic characterization have been obtained. The relation between beliefs (as well as defaults) and probabilistic techniques has been studied for some time, there are characterizations of desires and goals in decision-theoretic terms [6], there are various interpretations of obligations and norms, for example as social laws [8], and there are preliminary results on intention [1]. See our comparison paper [4] for an overview. The most problematic issue in decision-theoretic deliberation is the characterization of intention. Roughly, whereas beliefs have been related to probabilities, desires to utilities, and obligations to social laws, intentions do not seem to have an obvious counterpart in classical game and decision theory. However, most discussions on the popular BDI model have focussed on the role of intention in deliberation [2]. Consequently, we believe that intention is the benchmark example of decision-theoretic deliberation. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/CommonSense05.pdf}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/CommonSense05.pdf} } @InProceedings{Boella-etal:finco05, Title = {Coordination in Normative Multiagent Systems}, Author = {G. Boella and J. Hulstijn and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Procs. of FInCo'05}, Year = {2005}, Abstract = {We survey some of our work in deontic logic and normative multiagent systems. First we discuss how deontic logic may help the coordination of components by discussing the use of logic as a secretarial assistant, which facilitates exogenous coordination. Secondly, we discuss which concepts normative multiagent systems to offer to coordination, by discussing contracts and roles. Thirdly, we discuss how social commitments help coordination, by discussing the distinction and possible synthesis between the FIPA approach and the social semantics approach.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/finco05.pdf}, Date-modified = {2011-12-20 17:14:01 +0100}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/finco05.pdf} } @InProceedings{Boella-etal:cmna04, Title = {Persuasion Strategies in Dialogue}, Author = {G. Boella and J. Hulstijn and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Procs. of CMNA Workshop at ECAI'04}, Year = {2004}, Address = {Valencia}, Abstract = {In this abstract we consider dialogues that have a normative aspect. A dialogue is regulated by norms, but can also establish new norms. Certain utterances count as a particular dialogue move in some dialogue game, which creates obligations and permissions for the participants. But norms do not operate in isolation; we study their relation to mental attitudes of participants, in particular beliefs (information), desires, goals or intentions.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/cmna04.pdf}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/cmna04.pdf} } @InProceedings{Boella-etal:loft04, Title = {Decision-Theoretic Deliberation under Bounded Rationality}, Author = {G. Boella and J. Hulstijn and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Procs. of LOFT'04}, Year = {2004}, Address = {Leipzig}, Abstract = { Agent theory proposes to model the behavior of complex software systems in terms of mental attitudes like belief, desires, goals, intentions and obligations, ranging from, e.g., the PRS system [7] to the more recent BOID architecture [3]. Decision-theoretic deliberation captures concepts and reasoning mechanisms from agent theory in standard decision-theoretic terms. This is an ambitious enterprise, as it has the objective to bridge the worlds of decision theory and agent theory. Thus far, several partial results on the decision-theoretic characterization have been obtained. The relation between beliefs (as well as defaults) and probabilistic techniques has been studied for some time, there are characterizations of desires and goals in decision-theoretic terms [6], there are various interpretations of obligations and norms, for example as social laws [8], and there are preliminary results on intention [1]. See our comparison paper [4] for an overview. The most problematic issue in decision-theoretic deliberation is the characterization of intention. Roughly, whereas beliefs have been related to probabilities, desires to utilities, and obligations to social laws, intentions do not seem to have an obvious counterpart in classical game and decision theory. However, most discussions on the popular BDI model have focussed on the role of intention in deliberation [2]. Consequently, we believe that intention is the benchmark example of decision-theoretic deliberation.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/loft04.pdf}, Date-modified = {2011-12-20 17:13:44 +0100}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/loft04.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/aiia/BoellaHT05, Title = {Argumentation for Access Control}, Author = {Guido Boella and Joris Hulstijn and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {AI*IA}, Year = {2005}, Pages = {86-97}, Abstract = {In this paper we are interested in argument based reasoning for access control, for example in the context of agents negotiating access to resources or web services in virtual organizations.We use a logical framework which contains agents with objectives concerning access to a resource or provision of a service, including security objectives. The access control mechanism is described by a set of policy rules, that specify that access to a resource or service requires a specific set of credentials. Our contribution is a formalization of the reasoning about access control using a planning theory formalized in Dung's abstract argumentation framework.We build on Amgoud's argumentation framework for plan arguments, which is based on an adaptation of Dung's notion of defence. Our formal argumentation framework allows arguments about the backward derivation of plans from objectives and policy rules (abduction), as well as arguments about the forward derivation of goals from general objectives. We show that reasoning about the feasibility of goals requires mixed goal-plan arguments, and we show how to formalize the plan arguments in Dung's framework without adapting the notion of defence. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/aiia05.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/11558590_10}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/aiia05.pdf} } @Article{DBLP:journals/entcs/BoellaHT05, Title = {Interaction in Normative Multi-Agent Systems}, Author = {Guido Boella and Joris Hulstijn and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Journal = {Electr. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci.}, Year = {2005}, Number = {5}, Pages = {135-162}, Volume = {141}, Abstract = {The central research question of this paper is how notions developed in interactive computing such as abstract behavior types, the coordination language Reo, and Boolean circuits with registers, can be used to extend logical input/output nets, or lions for short. Lions are based on input/output logic, a deontic logic which is not used as a (non-classical) inference engine deriving output from input, but as a secretarial assistant for logically assisted transformations from input to output. We consider two extensions of input/output logics and lions. First, we consider input/output logics defined on infinite sequences (or streams) of inputs and outputs. Secondly, we consider lions with AND and register gates, formalizing the behavior of channels and connectors. We discuss also the role of interactive computing in normative multi-agent systems motivating the development of lions. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/entcs05.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.entcs.2005.05.020}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/entcs05.pdf} } @Other{10993/14604, Title = {Eunomos, a Legal Document and Knowledge Management System to Build Legal Services}, Abstract = {We introduce the Eunomos software, an advanced legal document management system with terminology management. We describe the challenges of legal research in an increasingly complex, multi-level and multi-lingual world and how the Eunomos software helps expert users keep track of the state of the relevant law on any given topic. We will describe in particular the editorial process for building legal knowledge.}, Author = {Boella, G. and Humphreys, L. and Martin, M. and Rossi, P. and van der Torre, L.}, Publisher = {Springer}, Timestamp = {2015.01.26}, Url = {http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007\%2F978-3-642-35731-2\_9?LI=true}, Year = {2012} } @Other{10993/19602, Title = {A Critical Analysis of Legal Requirements Engineering from the Perspective of Legal Practice}, Author = {Boella, G. and Humphreys, L. and Muthuri, R. and van der Torre, L. and Rossi, P.}, Timestamp = {2015.01.26}, Year = {2014} } @Other{10993/19591, Title = {Managing legal interpretation in regulatory compliance}, Author = {Boella, G. and Janssen, M. and Joris, H. and Humphreys, L. and van der Torre, L.}, Timestamp = {2015.01.26}, Year = {2013} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/ecsqaru/BoellaKT09, Title = {Dynamics in Argumentation with Single Extensions: Abstraction Principles and the Grounded Extension}, Author = {Guido Boella and Souhila Kaci and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty, 10th European Conference, ECSQARU 2009, Verona, Italy, July 1-3, 2009. Proceedings}, Year = {2009}, Editor = {Claudio Sossai and Gaetano Chemello}, Pages = {107-118}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {5590}, Abstract = {In this paper we consider the dynamics of abstract argumentation in Baroni and Giacomin's framework for the evaluation of extension based argumentation semantics. Following Baroni and Giacomin, we do not consider individual approaches, but we define general principles or postulates that individual approaches may satisfy. In particular, we define abstraction principles for the attack relation, and for the arguments in the framework. We illustrate the principles on the grounded extension. In this paper we consider only principles for the single extension case, and leave the multiple extension case to further research.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Date-modified = {2011-09-25 17:46:33 +0200}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-02906-6_11}, ISBN = {978-3-642-02905-9}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-02906-6_11} } @InProceedings{BPPTT07b, Title = {Choosing Your Beliefs}, Author = {Guido Boella and C{\'{e}}lia Da Costa Pereira and Gabriella Pigozzi and Andrea Tettamanzi and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Normative Multi-agent Systems}, Year = {2007}, Abstract = {This paper presents and discusses a novel approach to indeterministic belief revision. An indeterministic belief revision operator assumes that, when an agent is confronted with a new piece of information, it can revise its belief sets in more than one way. We define a rational agent not only in terms of what it believes but also of what it desires and wants to achieve. Hence, we propose that the agent's goals play a role in the choice of (possibly) one of the several available revision options. Properties of the new belief revision mechanism are also investigated.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/07122.daCostaPereiraCelia.Paper.938.pdf} } @InCollection{COIN10, Title = {Group Intention Is Social Choice with Commitment}, Author = {Boella, G. and Pigozzi, G. and Slavkovik, M. and van der Torre, L.}, Booktitle = {Coordination, Organizations, Institutions, and Norms in Agent Systems VI}, Publisher = {Springer Berlin / Heidelberg}, Year = {2011}, Editor = {De Vos, M. and Fornara, N. and Pitt, J. and Vouros, G.}, Pages = {152-171}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {6541}, Abstract = {An agent intends g if it has chosen to pursue goal g an is committed to pursuing g . How do groups decide on a common goal? Social epistemology offers two views on collective attitudes: according to the summative approach, a group has attitude p if all or most of the group members have the attitude p; according to the non-summative approach, for a group to have attitude p it is required that the members together agree that they have attitude p. The summative approach is used extensively in multi-agent systems. We propose a formalization of non-summative group intentions, using social choice to determine the group goals. We use judgment aggregation as a decision-making mechanism and a multi-modal multi-agent logic to represent the collective attitudes, as well as the commitment and revision strategies for the groups intentions.}, ISBN = {978-3-642-21267-3}, Keyword = {Computer Science}, Url = {http://www.springerlink.com/content/416771343101l60h/} } @InProceedings{COIN11, Title = {A Satisficing Agreements Model}, Author = {Boella, G. and Pigozzi, G. and Slavkovik, M. and van der Torre, L.}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the 13th International Workshop on Coordination, Organization, Institutions and Norms (COIN@WI-IAT)}, Year = {2011}, Editor = {van Riemsdijk, M. B. and Salceda, J.V.}, Abstract = {Satisficing, the concept proposed by Herbert Simon, as an approach to reaching agreements is little explored. We propose a model for satisficing agreement reaching for an adaptive collaborative group of agents. The group consists of one human agent familiar with the problem and arbitrarily many artificial agents. Our model raises to the team level the recognition-primed decision model constructed in the field of cognitive decision-making by using social choice for reaching group opinions.}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/coin11.pdf} } @InProceedings{BPST10a, Title = {Group Intentions are Social Choice with Commitment}, Author = {Guido Boella and Gabriella Pigozzi and Marija Slavkovik and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Procs. of the 11th International Workshop on Coordination, Optimization, Institution and Norms in Multiagent Systems (COIN@MALLOW'10)}, Year = {2010}, Pages = {115-133}, Abstract = {A collaborative group is commonly defined as a set of agents, which share information and coordinate activities while working towards a common goal. How do groups decide which are their common goals and what to intend? According to the much cited theory of Cohen and Lavesque, an agent intends g if it has chosen to pursue goal g and it has committed itself to making g happen. Following the same line of reasoning, a group intention should be a collectively chosen goal with commitment. The literature often considers a collective goal to be one of those individual goals that are shared by all members. This approach presumes that a group goal is also an individual one and that the agents can act as a group if they share the beliefs relevant to this goal. This is not necessarily the case. We construct an abstract framework for groups in which common goals are determined by social choice. Our framework uses judgment aggregation to choose a group goal and a multi-modal multi-agent logic to define commitment and revision strategies for the group intentions.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Url = {http://www.springerlink.com/content/416771343101l60h/} } @InProceedings{BPST10b, Title = {Group Intentions are Social Choice with Commitment}, Author = {Guido Boella and Gabriella Pigozzi and Marija Slavkovik and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Procs. of the 8th European Workshop on Multi-agent Systems (EUMAS'10)}, Year = {2010}, Abstract = {A collaborative group is commonly defined as a set of agents, which share information and coordinate activities while working towards a common goal. How do groups decide which are their common goals and what to intend? According to the much cited theory of Cohen and Lavesque, an agent intends g if it has chosen to pursue goal g and it has committed itself to making g happen. Following the same line of reasoning, a group intention should be a collectively chosen goal with commitment. The literature often considers a collective goal to be one of those individual goals that are shared by all members. This approach presumes that a group goal is also an individual one and that the agents can act as a group if they share the beliefs relevant to this goal. This is not necessarily the case. We construct an abstract framework for groups in which common goals are determined by social choice. Our framework uses judgment aggregation to choose a group goal and a multi-modal multi-agent logic to define commitment and revision strategies for the group intentions.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Url = {http://publications.uni.lu/record/5684} } @InProceedings{BPT09b, Title = {Normative systems in computer science. Ten guidelines for normative multiagent systems}, Author = {Guido Boella and Gabriella Pigozzi and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Normative Multi-Agent Systems, Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings 09121}, Year = {2009}, Editor = {Guido Boella and P. Noriega and Gabriella Pigozzi and H. Verhagen}, Month = mar, Note = {15-20 March 2009, Internationales Begegnungs- und Forschungszentrum fuer Informatik (IBFI), Schloss Dagstuhl, Germany}, Abstract = {In this paper we introduce and discuss ten guidelines for the use of normative systems in computer science. We adopt a multiagent sys- tems perspective, because norms are used to coordinate, organize, guide, regulate or control interaction among distributed autonomous systems. The first six guidelines are derived from the computer science literature. From the so-called `normchange' definition of the first workshop on nor- mative multiagent systems in 2005 we derive the guidelines to motivate which definition of normative multiagent system is used, to make explicit why norms are a kind of (soft) constraints deserving special analysis, and to explain why and how norms can be changed at runtime. From the so-called `mechanism design' definition of the second workshop on nor- mative multiagent systems in 2007 we derive the guidelines to discuss the use and role of norms as a mechanism in a game-theoretic setting, clarify the role of norms in the multiagent system, and to relate the no- tion of ``norm'' to the legal, social, or moral literature. The remaining four guidelines follow from the philosophical literature: use norms also to resolve dilemmas, and in general to coordinate, organize, guide, regulate or control interaction among agents, distinguish norms from obligations, prohibitions and permissions, use the deontic paradoxes only to illustrate the normative multiagent system, and consider regulative norms in rela- tion to other kinds of norms and other social-cognitive computer science concepts.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Date-modified = {2011-09-25 18:00:31 +0200}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/BPT09b.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/atal/BoellaPT09, Title = {Normative framework for normative system change}, Author = {Guido Boella and Gabriella Pigozzi and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {The 8th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2009), Budapest, Hungary, May 10-15, 2009, Volume 1}, Year = {2009}, Editor = {Carles Sierra and Cristiano Castelfranchi and Keith S. Decker and Jaime Sim{\~a}o Sichman}, Pages = {169-176}, Publisher = {IFAAMAS}, Abstract = {Normative systems in a multiagent system must be able to evolve over time, for example due to actions creating or removing norms in the system. The only formal framework to evaluate and classify normative system change methods is the so-called AGM framework of theory change, which has originally been developed as a framework to describe and classify both belief and normative system change. However, it has been used for belief change only, since the beliefs or norms are represented as propositional formulas. We therefore propose, as a normative framework for normative system change, to replace propositional formulas in the AGM framework of theory change by pairs of propositional formulas, representing the rule based character of norms, and to add several principles from the input/output logic framework. In this new framework, we show that some of the AGM properties cannot be expressed, and other properties are consistent only for some logics, but not for others.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Ee = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1558013.1558036}, ISBN = {978-0-9817381-6-1}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/03-aamas09a.pdf} } @InProceedings{BPT09, Title = {Five guidelines for normative multiagent systems}, Author = {Guido Boella and Gabriella Pigozzi and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of JURIX 2009 - The 22nd International Conference on Legal Knowledge and Information Systems}, Year = {2009}, Address = {Rotterdam, The Netherlands}, Month = dec, Publisher = {IOS Press}, Series = {Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications}, Abstract = {In this paper we introduce and discuss five guidelines for the use of normative systems in computer science. We adopt a multiagent systems perspective, because norms are used to coordinate, organize, guide, regulate or control interaction among distributed autonomous systems. They are derived from the computer science literature. From the so-called 'normchange' definition of the first workshop on normative multiagent systems in 2005 we derive the guidelines to motivate which definition of normative multiagent system is used, to make explicit why norms are a kind of (soft) constraints deserving special analysis, and to explain why and how norms can be changed at runtime. From the so-called 'mechanism design' definition of the second workshop on normative multiagent systems in 2007 we derive the guidelines to discuss the use and role of norms as a mechanism in a game-theoretic setting, and to clarify the role of norms in the multiagent system.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Date-modified = {2011-09-25 17:48:42 +0200}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/jurix09.pdf} } @InProceedings{BPT09a, Title = {Normative framework for normative system change}, Author = {Guido Boella and Gabriella Pigozzi and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the Eighth International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 09)}, Year = {2009}, Month = may, Note = {(nominated for the Best Paper Award), 10-15 May 2009, Budapest, Hungary.}, Abstract = {Normative systems in a multiagent system must be able to evolve over time, for example due to actions creating or removing norms in the system. The only formal framework to evaluate and classify normative system change methods is the so-called AGM framework of theory change, which has originally been developed as a framework to describe and classify both belief and normative system change. However, it has been used for belief change only, since the beliefs or norms are represented as propositional formulas. We therefore propose, as a normative framework for normative system change, to replace propositional formulas in the AGM framework of theory change by pairs of propositional formulas, representing the rule based character of norms, and to add several principles from the input/output logic framework. In this new framework, we show that some of the AGM properties cannot be expressed, and other properties are consistent only for some logics, but not for others.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Date-modified = {2011-09-25 17:58:20 +0200}, Url = {http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=1558013.1558036} } @Article{BST07, Title = {From Social Power to Social Importance}, Author = {G. Boella and L. Sauro and L. van der Torre}, Journal = {Web Intelligence and Agent Systems journal}, Year = {2007}, Pages = {393-404}, Volume = {5}, Abstract = {In this paper we introduce a method to measure the social importance of an agent in a multiagent system, using a directed graph representing dependencies among agents to achieve their goals, so-called dependence graphs pioneered by Castelfranchi, Conte and Sichman. Our measure is derived from van den Brink and Gilles' beta-measure to rank agents, using a directed graph representing an abstract dominance relation among agents. In particular, we show how to define power structures and dependence networks from the goals and skills of individual agents, and how to adapt the beta-measure for such dependence networks based on their topological properties. Moreover, we show that our notion of social importance has a simple and intuitive meaning: it measures the discontent of the other agents in case the agent would leave the society.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Url = {http://iospress.metapress.com/content/n3ug71j4610rg73g/} } @InProceedings{Boella-etal:ecai06, Title = {Strengthening Admissible Coalitions}, Author = {G. Boella and L. Sauro and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Procs. of the 17th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI'06)}, Year = {2006}, Address = {Amsterdam}, Pages = {195-199}, Publisher = {IOS}, Abstract = {We develop a criterion for coalition formation among goal-directed agents, the indecomposable do-ut-des property. The indecomposable do-ut-des property refines the do-ut-des property (literally give to get) by considering the fact that agents prefer to form coalitions whose components cannot be formed independently. A formal description of this property is provided as well as an analysis of algorithms and their complexity. }, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ecai06a.pdf}, Location = {Riva del Garda}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ecai06a.pdf} } @InProceedings{Boella-etal:ceas04, Title = {Power and Dependence in Multiagent Systems}, Author = {G. Boella and L. Sauro and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Procs. of CEAS Workshop at ECAI'04}, Year = {2004}, Address = {Valencia}, Abstract = {An important aim in the field of Multiagent Systems is to study emergent social structures, such as groups and collectives. The relevance of social structures in Distributed Artificial Intelligence, Artificial Life, Sociology necessitates a well motivated definition of their characteristics. The research question of this paper is to formalize the results obtained by Castelfranchi that try to bridge the gap between the BDI model and the macro-level of Multiagent Systems. We presented in (AAMAS04)general social viewpoints on Multiagent Systems and in (ECAI04) we have detailed a derivation of coalition structures from power structures. In this paper we continue the research, and we define power in terms of cognitive (or mind) view, i.e., starting from the characteristics of the single agents as their goals and skills. Properties of collectives, as mutual dependence or cooperation, are also hierarchically defined by means of the definition of power. It is shown that upper levels of this hierarchy need mental model of the agents more and more complex. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ceas04.ps}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ceas04.ps} } @Article{DBLP:journals/igpl/BoellaST09, Title = {Algorithms for finding coalitions exploiting a new reciprocity condition}, Author = {Guido Boella and Luigi Sauro and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Journal = {Logic Journal of the IGPL}, Year = {2009}, Number = {3}, Pages = {273-297}, Volume = {17}, Abstract = {We introduce a reciprocity criterion for coalition formation among goal-directed agents, which we call the indecomposable do-ut-des property. It refines an older reciprocity property, called the do-ut-des or give-to-get property by considering the fact that agents prefer to form coalitions whose components cannot be formed independently. A formal description of this property is provided as well as an analysis of algorithms and their complexity. We provide an algorithm to decide whether a coalition has the desired property, and we show that the problem to verify whether a single coalition satisfies the property is tractable. Moreover, we provide an algorithm to search all the sub-coalitions of a given coalition satisfying the new property. Even if this problem is not computationally tractable, we show that in several cases, also the complexity of this problem may decrease considerably.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://jigpal.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/jzp008?ijkey=9alKpgJ9lYP8fHr&keytype=ref}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Date-modified = {2011-09-25 17:32:41 +0200}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jigpal/jzp008}, Url = {http://jigpal.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/jzp008?ijkey=9alKpgJ9lYP8fHr&keytype=ref} } @Article{DBLP:journals/entcs/BoellaT06, Title = {Preface.}, Author = {G. Boella and L. van der Torre (Eds.)}, Journal = {Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science (ENTCS) Procs. of the First International Workshop on Coordination and Organisation (CoOrg 2005)}, Year = {2006}, Number = {3}, Pages = {1-2}, Volume = {150}, Affiliation = {icr}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.entcs.2006.03.001}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.entcs.2006.03.001} } @InProceedings{springerlink:10.1007/11574781_8, Title = {Permission and Authorization in Policies for Virtual Communities of Agents}, Author = {Boella, Guido and van der Torre, Leendert}, Booktitle = {Agents and Peer-to-Peer Computing}, Year = {2005}, Editor = {Moro, Gianluca and Bergamaschi, Sonia and Aberer, Karl}, Note = {10.1007/11574781_8}, Pages = {86-97}, Publisher = {Springer Berlin / Heidelberg}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {3601}, Abstract = {We study the design of policies for virtual communities of agents based on peer-to-peer systems or the grid infrastructure. In a virtual community agents can play both the role of resource consumers and the role of resource providers. Moreover, the agents remain in control of their resources, and therefore we distinguish between the authorization to access a resource given by the virtual community and the permission to do so issued by the resource providers. We propose a logical multiagent framework for virtual communities that distinguishes three roles: resource consumption, provision, as well as authorization. }, Affiliation = {Dipartimento di Informatica, Universit{\`a} di Torino, Italy}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ap2pc04.pdf}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ap2pc04.pdf} } @Article{DBLP:journals/ail/BoellaT08, Title = {Institutions with a hierarchy of authorities in distributed dynamic environments}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert van der Torre}, Journal = {Artif. Intell. Law}, Year = {2008}, Number = {1}, Pages = {53-71}, Volume = {16}, Abstract = {A single global authority is not sufficient to regulate heterogenous agents in multiagent systems based on distributed architectures, due to idiosyncratic local situations and to the need to regulate new issues as soon as they arise. On the one hand institutions should be structured as normative systems with a hierarchy of authorities able to cope with the dynamics of local situations, but on the other hand higher authorities should be able to delimit the autonomy of lower authorities to issue valid norms. In this paper we study the interplay of obligations and strong permissions in the context of hierarchies of authorities using input/output logic, because its explicit norm base facilitates reasoning about norm base maintenance, and it covers a variety of conditional obligations and permissions. We combine the logic with constraints, priorities and hierarchies of authorities. In this setting we observe that Makinson and van der Torre's notion of prohibition immunity for permissions is no longer sufficient, and we introduce a new notion of permission as exception and a new distinction between static and dynamic norms. We show how strong permissions can dynamically change an institution by adding exceptions to obligations, provide an explicit representation of what is permitted to the subjects of the normative system and allow higher level authorities to limit the power of lower level authorities to change the normative system.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ailaw07a.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10506-007-9059-8}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ailaw07a.pdf} } @Article{DBLP:journals/japll/BoellaT08, Title = {Substantive and procedural norms in normative multiagent systems}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert van der Torre}, Journal = {J. Applied Logic}, Year = {2008}, Number = {2}, Pages = {152-171}, Volume = {6}, Abstract = {Procedural norms are instrumental norms addressed to agents playing a role in the nor- mative system, for example to motivate these role playing agents to recognize violations or to apply sanctions. Procedural norms have first been discussed in law, where they address legal practitioners such as legislators, lawyers and policemen, but they are dis- cussed now too in normative multiagent systems to motivate software agents. Procedural norms aim to achieve the social order specified using regulative norms like obligations and permissions, and constitutive norms like counts-as obligations. In this paper we formalize procedural, regulative and constitutive norms using input/output logic enriched with an agent ontology and an abstraction hierarchy. We show how our formalization explains Castelfranchi's notion of mutual empowerment, stating that not only the agents playing a role in a normative system are empowered by the normative system, but the normative system itself is also empowered by the agents playing a role in it. In our terminology, the agents are not only institutionally empowered, but they are also delegated normative goals from the system. Together, institutional empowerment and normative goal delega- tion constitute a mechanism which we call delegation of power, where agents acting on behalf of the normative system become in charge of recognizing which institutional facts follow from brute facts. }, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/jal08.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Date-modified = {2011-12-20 17:49:49 +0100}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jal.2007.06.006}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/jal08.pdf} } @Article{Boella-Torre:ailaw07a, Title = {The Ontological Properties of Social Roles in Multi-agent Systems: Definitional Dependence, Powers and Roles Playing Roles}, Author = {G. Boella and L. van der Torre}, Journal = {Artificial Intelligence and Law Journal (AILaw)}, Year = {2007}, Abstract = {In this paper we address the problem of defining social roles in multi-agent systems. Social roles provide the basic structure of social institutions and organizations. We start from the properties attributed to roles both in the multi-agent systems and the Object Oriented community, and we use them in an ontological analysis of the notion of social role. We identify three main properties of social roles. First, they are definitionally dependent on the institution they belong to, i.e. the definition of a role is given inside the definition of the institution. Second, they attribute powers to the agents playing them, like creating commitments for the institutions and the other roles. Third, they allow roles to play roles, in the same way as agents do. Using Input/Output logics, we propose a formalization of roles in multi-agent systems satisfying the three properties we identified.}, Url = {http://www.di.unito.it/~guido/PS/boella-torre-ailaw07a.pdf} } @Article{BT07a, Title = {Norm negotiation in multiagent systems}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert van der Torre}, Journal = {International Journal of Cooperative Information Systems (IJCIS) Special Issue: Emergent Agent Societies}, Year = {2007}, Number = {2}, Volume = {16}, Abstract = {Normative multiagent systems provide agents with abilities to autonomously devise societies and organizations coordinating their behavior via social norms and laws. In this paper we study how agents negotiate new social norms and when they accept them. We introduce a negotiation model based on what we call the social delegation cycle, which explains the negotiation of new social norms from agent desires in three steps. First individual agents or their representatives negotiate social goals, then a social goal is negotiated in a social norm, and finally the social norm is accepted by the agents when it leads to fulfilment of the desires the cycle started with. We characterize the allowed proposals during social goal negotiation as mergers of the individual agent desires, and we characterize the allowed proposals during norm negotiation as both joint plans to achieve the social goal (obligations associated with the norm) and the associated sanctions or rewards (a control system associated with the norm). The norm is accepted when the norm is stable in the sense that agents will act according to the norm, and effective in the sense that fulfilment of the norm leads to achievement of the agents' desires. We also compare norm negotiation with contract negotiation and negotiation of the distribution of obligations.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ijcis06.pdf}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ijcis06.pdf} } @InProceedings{Boella-Torre:BNAIC06, Title = {Norm Negotiation Power.}, Author = {G. Boella and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of BNAIC06}, Year = {2006}, Abstract = {In social mechanism design, norm negotiation creates individual or contractual obligations fulfilling goals of the agents. The social delegation cycle distinguishes among social goal negotiation, obligation and sanction negotiation and norm acceptance. Power may affect norm negotiation in various ways, and we therefore introduce a new formalization of the social delegation cycle based on power and dependence, without referring to the rule structure of norms, actions, decision variables, tasks, and so on. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/bnaic06.pdf}, Date-modified = {2011-12-20 17:53:01 +0100}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/bnaic06.pdf} } @InProceedings{Boella-Torre:clima05, Title = {Constitutive Norms in the Design of Normative Multiagent Systems}, Author = {G. Boella and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Computational Logic in Multi-Agent Systems, 6th International Workshop (CLIMA VI)}, Year = {2006}, Address = {Berlin}, Pages = {303-319}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {LNCS}, Volume = {3900}, Abstract = {In this paper, we consider the design of normative multiagent systems composed of both constitutive and regulative norms. We analyze the properties of constitutive norms, in particular their lack of reflexivity, and the trade-off between constitutive and regulative norms in the design of normative systems. As methodology we use the metaphor of describing social entities as agents and of attributing them mental attitudes. In this agent metaphor, regulative norms expressing obligations and permissions are modelled as goals of social entities, and constitutive norms expressing ``counts-as'' relations are their beliefs.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Url = {http://www.springerlink.com/content/m048q882q28j1508/} } @InProceedings{Boella-Torre:DALT06, Title = {A Foundational Ontology of Organizations and Roles}, Author = {G. Boella and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Declarative Agent Languages and Technologies IV, 4th International Workshop (DALT'06)}, Year = {2006}, Pages = {78-88}, Series = {LNCS}, Volume = {4327}, Abstract = {In this paper we propose a foundational ontology of the social concepts of organization and role which structure institutions. We identify which axioms model social concepts like organization and role and which properties distinguish them from other categories like objects and agents: the organizational structure of institutions, the relation between roles and organizations, and the powers among the components of an organization. All social concepts depend on descriptions defining them, which are collectively accepted, and the description defining the components of organizations, including roles, are included in the description of the organizations they belong to. Thus, the relational dependence of roles means that they are defined in the organizations they belong to. Finally, powers inside organizations are defined by the fact that components of an organization can access the state of the organization whose definition they depend on and of the other components, thus violating the standard encapsulation principle of objects.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/dalt06.pdf}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/dalt06.pdf} } @InProceedings{Boella-Torre:deon06a, Title = {Delegation of Power in Normative Multiagent Systems}, Author = {G. Boella and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Deontic Logic and Artificial Normative Systems, 8th International Workshop on Deontic Logic in Computer Science ({$\Delta$EON}'06)}, Year = {2006}, Address = {Berlin}, Pages = {36-52}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {LNCS}, Volume = {4048}, Abstract = {In this paper we reconsider the definition of counts-as relations in normative multiagent systems: counts-as relations do not always provide directly an abstract interpretation of brute facts in terms of institutional facts. We argue that in many cases the inference of institutional facts from brute facts is the result of actions of agents acting on behalf of the normative systems and who are in charge of recognizing which institutional facts follow from brute facts. We call this relation delegation of power: it is composed of a counts-as relation specifying that the effect of an action of an agent is an institutional fact and by a goal of the normative system that the fact is considered as an institutional fact. This relation is more complex than institutional empowerment, where an action of an agent counts-as an action of the normative system but no goal is involved, and than delegation of goals, where a goal is delegated to an agent without giving it any power.With two case studies we show the importance of the delegation of power. Finally, we show how the new definition can be related with existing ones by using different levels of abstraction. }, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/deon06b.pdf}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/deon06b.pdf} } @InProceedings{Boella-Torre:deon06b, Title = {A Logical Architecture of a Normative System}, Author = {G. Boella and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Deontic Logic and Artificial Normative Systems, 8th International Workshop on Deontic Logic in Computer Science ({$\Delta$EON}'06)}, Year = {2006}, Address = {Berlin}, Pages = {24-35}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {LNCS}, Volume = {4048}, Abstract = {Logical architectures combine several logics into a more complex logical system. In this paper we study a logical architecture using input/output operations corresponding to the functionality of logical components. We illustrate how the architectural approach can be used to develop a logic of a normative system based on logics of counts-as conditionals, institutional constraints, obligations and permissions. In this example we adapt for counts-as conditionals and institutional constraints a proposal of Jones and Sergot, and for obligations and permissions we adapt the input/output logic framework of Makinson and van der Torre. We use our architecture to study logical relations among counts-as conditionals, institutional constraints, obligations and permissions. We show that in our logical architecture the combined system of counts-as conditionals and institutional constraints reduces to the logic of institutional constraints, which again reduces to an expression in the underlying base logic. Counts-as conditionals and institutional constraints are defined as a pre-processing step for the regulative norms. Permissions are defined as exceptions to obligations and their interaction is characterized. }, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/deon06c.pdf}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/deon06c.pdf} } @InProceedings{Boella-Torre:ecai06a, Title = {Count-As Conditionals, Classification and Context.}, Author = {G. Boella and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Procs. of the 17th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI'06)}, Year = {2006}, Abstract = {Searle represents constitutive norms as count-as conditionals, written as `X counts as Y in context C'. Grossi et al. study a class of these conditionals as `in context C, X is classified as Y'. In this paper we propose a generalization of this relation among count-as conditionals, classification and context, by defining a class of count-as conditionals as `X in context C0 is classified as Y in context C'. We show that if context C0 can be different from context C, then we can represent a larger class of examples, and we have a weaker logic of count-as conditionals.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ecai06c.pdf}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ecai06c.pdf} } @InProceedings{Boella-Torre:ecai06b, Title = {Fair Distribution of Collective Obligations.}, Author = {G. Boella and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Procs. of the 17th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence(ECAI'06)}, Year = {2006}, Address = {Amsterdam}, Pages = {721-722}, Publisher = {IOS}, Abstract = {In social mechanism design, obligation distribution creates individual or contractual obligations that imply a collective obligation. A distinguishing feature from group planning is that also the sanction of the collective obligation has to be distributed, for example by creating sanctions for the individual or contractual obligations. In this paper we address fairness in obligation distribution for more or less powerful agents, in the sense that some agents can perform more or less actions than others. Based on this power to perform actions, we characterize a trade-off in negotiation power. On the one hand, more powerful agents may have a disadvantage during the negotiation, as they may be one of the few or even the only agent who can see to some of the actions that have to be performed to fulfill the collective obligation. On the other hand, powerful agents may have an advantage in some negotiation protocols, as they have a larger variety of proposals to choose from. Moreover, powerful agents have an advantage because they can choose from a larger set of possible coalitions. We present an ontology and measures to find a fair tradeoff between these two forces in social mechanism design.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ecai06b.pdf}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ecai06b.pdf} } @Article{Boella-Torre:entcs06, Title = {Coordination and Organization: Definitions, Examples and Future Research Directions.}, Author = {G. Boella and L. van der Torre}, Journal = {Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science (ENTCS)}, Year = {2006}, Number = {3}, Pages = {3-20}, Volume = {150}, Abstract = {Coordination languages and models like Linda and Reo have been developed in com- puter science to coordinate the interaction among components and objects, and are nowadays used to model and analyze organizations too. Moreover, organizational concepts are used to enrich the existing coordination languages and models. We describe this research area of ``organization and coordination'' by presenting definitions, examples, and future research directions. We highlight two issues. First, we argue for a study of value-based rather than information-based coordination languages to model the coordination of autonomous agents and organizations. Second, we argue for a study of the balance between enforced control and trust-based anticipation to deal with security aspects in the coordination of organizations.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/entcs06a.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.entcs.2006.03.002}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/entcs06a.pdf} } @InProceedings{Boella-Torre:oop05, Title = {Organizations in Artificial Social Systems}, Author = {G. Boella and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Coordination, Organizations, Institutions, and Norms in Multi-Agent Systems AAMAS 2005 International Workshops on Agents, Norms, and Institutions for Regulated Multiagent Systems, ANIREM 2005 and on Organizations in Multi-Agent Systems, OOOP 2005}, Year = {2006}, Address = {Berlin}, Pages = {198-210}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {LNAI}, Volume = {3913}, Abstract = {In this paper we introduce organizations and roles in Shoham and Tennenholtz' artificial social systems, using a normative system. We model how real agents determine the behavior of organizations by playing roles in the organization, and how the organization controls the behavior of agents playing a role in it. We consider the design of an organization in terms of roles and the assignment of agents to roles, and the evolution of organizations. We do not present a complete formalization of the computational problems, but we illustrate our approach by examples.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Url = {http://www.springerlink.com/content/1571519621682k96/} } @InProceedings{Boella-Torre:polishai06, Title = {Game-Theoretic Foundations for Norms}, Author = {G. Boella and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Procs. of Artificial Intelligence Studies}, Year = {2006}, Pages = {39-51}, Volume = {3(26)}, Abstract = {In this paper we study game-theoretic foundations for norms. We assume that a norm is a mechanism to obtain desired multi-agent system behavior, and must therefore under normal or typical circumstances be fulfilled by a range of agent types, such as norm internalizing agents, respectful agents fulfilling norms if possible, and selfish agents obeying norms only due to the associated sanctions.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/polishai06.pdf}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/polishai06.pdf} } @Article{Boella-Torre:smca06, Title = {Security Policies for Sharing Knowledge in Virtual Communities}, Author = {G. Boella and L. van der Torre}, Journal = {IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics - Part A: Systems and Humans}, Year = {2006}, Number = {3}, Pages = {439-450}, Volume = {36}, Abstract = {Knowledge management exploits the new opportunities of sharing knowledge among members of virtual communities in distributed computer networks, and knowledge-management systems are therefore modeled and designed as multiagent systems. In this paper, normative multiagent systems for secure knowledge management based on access-control policies are studied. It is shown how distributed access control is realized by means of local policies of access-control systems for documents of knowledge providers, and by means of global community policies regulating these local policies. Moreover, it is shown how such a virtual community of multiple knowledge providers respects the autonomy of the knowledge providers. }, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/smca06.pdf}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/smca06.pdf} } @Article{Boella-Torre:smcc06, Title = {A Game Theoretic Approach to Contracts in Multiagent Systems}, Author = {G. Boella and L. van der Torre}, Journal = {IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics - Part C: Applications and Reviews}, Year = {2006}, Number = {1}, Pages = {68-79}, Volume = {36}, Abstract = {Contracts are used to create new interaction possibilities among agents, and therefore play an important role in the game theoretic analysis of agent interaction. We use normative multiagent systems to model both the contracts and the interactions. In particular, we formalize contracts as systems of regulative and constitutive norms within a larger rule-governed setting and, using recursive modeling, we develop a game theory wherein agents make contracts. We show how agents can modify the behavior of normative systems by means of constitutive rules in the contract changing these systems, and we illustrate how agents use the game theory within contract negotiation in organizations.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Date-modified = {2011-12-21 13:26:53 +0100}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/smcc06.pdf} } @InProceedings{Boella-Torre:cogsci05, Title = {From the Theory of Mind to the Construction of Social Reality}, Author = {G. Boella and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Procs. of Annual Conference on the Cognitive Science Society}, Year = {2005}, Address = {Mahwah (NJ)}, Pages = {298--303}, Publisher = {Lawrence Erlbaum}, Abstract = {In this paper we argue that the hypothesis of the theory of mind advanced in cognitive science can be the basis not only of the social abilities which allow interaction among individuals, but also of the construction of social reality. The theory of mind is the attribution, via the agent metaphor, of mental attitudes, like beliefs and goals, to other agents. Analogously, we attribute mental attitudes to social entities, like groups, normative systems and organizations with roles. The agent metaphor explains the necessary abilities to deal with complex aspects of social behavior, like acting in a group, playing a role in an organization, and living in a reality organized in institutions which create regulative and constitutive norms to regulate behavior. To show the feasibility of this approach we provide a computational model of the construction of social reality based on multiagent systems.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/cogsci05.pdf}, Date-modified = {2011-12-20 17:13:26 +0100}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/cogsci05.pdf} } @Misc{Torre05ALNews18, Title = {Coordination and Organization 05 (event report)}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert van der Torre}, HowPublished = {AgentLink News 18}, Month = {August}, Year = {2005}, Abstract = {Organizations embody a powerful way to coordinate complex behavior in human society. Different models of organisations exist, from bureaucratic systems based on norms to competitive systems based on markets. Moreover, organizational concepts allow to structure the behavior of complex entities in a hierarchy of encapsulated entities: departments structured in roles, organisations structured in departments, and interorganizational coordination structured in organizations. Organizations specify the interaction and communication possibilities of each of these entities, abstracting from the implementation of their behavior. Since these entities are autonomous, they can only be coordinated exogeneously.}, Pages = {36-37}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/agentlink05.pdf} } @InProceedings{Torre05Loait, Title = {The Ontological Properties of Social Roles: Definitional Dependence, Powers and Roles Playing Roles}, Author = {G. Boella and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of LOAIT'05}, Year = {2005}, Abstract = {In this paper we address the problem of defining social roles in MAS. Social roles provide the basic structure of social institutions and organizations. We start from the properties attributed to roles both in the MAS and the Object Oriented community, and we use them in an ontological analysis of the notion of social role. We thus identify as the main properties of social roles being definitionally dependent on the institution they belong to, attributing powers to the agents playing them, and allowing roles to play roles. The methodology we use to model roles is the agent metaphor: social roles, in the same way as social institutions, like normative systems and organizations, are attributed mental attitudes to explain their behavior.}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/loait05.doc} } @InProceedings{Boella-Torre:ceas04, Title = {Delta: The Social delegation Cycle}, Author = {G. Boella and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Procs. of CEAS Workshop at ECAI'04}, Year = {2004}, Address = {Valencia}, Abstract = {In this paper we consider the relation between desires and obligations in normative multiagent systems. We introduce a model of their relation based on what we call the social delegation cycle, which explains the creation of norms from agent desires in three steps. First individual agent desires generate group goals, then a group goal is individualized in a social norm, and finally the norm is accepted by the agents when it leads to the fulfilment of the desires the cycle started with. We formalize the social delegation cycle by formalizing goal generation as a merging process of the individual agent desires, we formalize norm creation as a planning process for both the obligation and the associated sanctions or rewards, and we formalize the acceptance relation as both a belief of agents that the fulfilment of the norm leads to achievement of their desires, and the belief that other agents will act according to the norm.}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ecai04c.pdf} } @InProceedings{Boella-Torre:collint04, Title = {Attributing Mental Attitudes to Social Entities: Constitutive Rules are Beliefs, Regulative Rules are Goals}, Author = {G. Boella and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Procs. of Conference on Collective Intentionality IV}, Year = {2004}, Address = {Pontignano}, Abstract = {In this paper, we propose a model of constitutive and regu- lative norms in a logical multiagent framework. We analyze the relation- ship between these two types of rules and explain similarities between them, using the metaphor of considering social entities - like normative systems, groups and organizations - as agents and of attributing them mental attitudes as well as an autonomous behavior.We argue that while constitutive norms expressing "counts-as" relations are modelled as the beliefs of social entities, regulative norms, like obligations, prohibitions and permissions, are modelled as their goals.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/collint04.pdf}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/collint04.pdf} } @InProceedings{Boella-Torre:fois04, Title = {An agent oriented ontology of social reality}, Author = {G. Boella and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Procs. of FOIS'04}, Year = {2004}, Address = {Amsterdam}, Pages = {199-209}, Publisher = {IOS Press}, Abstract = { In this paper we introduce an ontology based on the notion of agent to represent and reason about social reality. We model social constructions as agents, for example, groups, organizations, normative systems, and roles, and we attribute mental attitudes to them. Roughly, we define obligations or regulative norms as goals of the normative system, constitutive norms as beliefs of the normative system, joint, shared, mutual and social beliefs, desires and goal as beliefs, desires and goals of group, responsibilities of an agent as goals of the role he plays, and the required expertise of an agent as beliefs and actions of the role he plays. In this way, we achieve a uniform framework for a large variety of concepts using a small vocabulary, and, in particular, basing it on notions, like mental attitudes, which are commonly used in agent theories. The proposed ontology is modelled using a description logic. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/fois04.pdf}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/fois04.pdf} } @InProceedings{Boella:2003:RNC:1047788.1047803, Title = {Rational norm creation: attributing mental attitudes to normative systems, part 2}, Author = {Boella, Guido and van der Torre, Leendert}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the 9th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law}, Year = {2003}, Address = {New York, NY, USA}, Pages = {81--82}, Publisher = {ACM}, Series = {ICAIL '03}, Abstract = {If a legislator introduces a new norm in a normative system, then rationality prescribes that it ensures that the norm can and will be fulfilled by agents subjected to the norm. Since agents may not follow the law, it associates sanctions with norms. But even with sanction-based obligations, some agents will look for ways to violate the norm while at the same time evading the sanction, for example by making sure that their violation will not be noticed, blocking the sanction, bribing the system, et cetera. Consequently, to reason about the creation of norms, we need a model of norm-evading agents. In [2] we argue that a model of normevading agents can be based on the attribution of mental attitudes to normative systems. In this paper we address the following two questions:1. How can the attribution of mental attitudes to normative systems be used to reason about norm creation?2. How can we formalize norm creation using the attribution of mental attitudes to normative systems?}, Acmid = {1047803}, Doi = {10.1145/1047788.1047803}, ISBN = {1-58113-747-8}, Location = {Scotland, United Kingdom}, Numpages = {2}, Url = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1047788.1047803} } @InProceedings{boellatorre:adc-aamas03, Title = {Division of Powers in MAS Control}, Author = {G. Boella and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Procs. of AAMAS Workshop on Autonomy, Delegation and Control}, Year = {2003}, Address = {Melbourne}, Abstract = {Decision making in multiagent systems has to deal with the norms regulating the system. In this paper we propose a logical framework based on three dimensions. First, we distinguish between agents whose behavior is governed by norms, defenders of these norms and autonomous normative systems; in this paper we call the latter two normative agents. Second, we distinguish some of the usual mental attitudes for all agents, including the normative agents. Third, we distinguish between behavior that counts as a violation, and sanctions that are applied. To formalize decision making we also extend this framework to a qualitative game theory. n-player games are based on recursive modelling: the bearer of obligations models the defender agents who have the duty to monitor violations and to apply sanctions, which in turn model the normative systems, which issue the norms and watch over the behavior of these defender agents. We show how normative systems can delegate monitoring and sanctioning of violations to autonomous defender agents, inspired by Montesquieu's trias politica.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/adc03.pdf}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/adc03.pdf} } @InProceedings{boellatorre:argument03, Title = {{BDI} and {BOID} Argumentation: Some examples and ideas for formalization}, Author = {G. Boella and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Procs. of IJCAI Workshop on Computational Models of Natural Argument}, Year = {2003}, Address = {Acapulco}, Abstract = {In this discussion paper we are interested in the role of argumentation in the context of cognitive BDI and BOID agents, i.e., agents whose deliberation is based on beliefs, obligations, intentions and desires. We discuss argumentation issues for single agent deliberation, multiagent dialogues, and interaction between agents and their normative system. For each category we discuss examples and we give a personal view on their formalization. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/cmna03.pdf}, Slides = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/cmna03-slides.ps.Z}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/cmna03.pdf} } @InProceedings{boellatorre:cogsci-ijcai03, Title = {Obligations and Permissions as Mental Entities}, Author = {G. Boella and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Procs. of IJCAI Workshop on Cognitive Modeling of Agents and Multi-Agent Interactions}, Year = {2003}, Address = {Acapulco}, Abstract = {Cognitive agents must have an explicit representation of their beliefs, desires and goals, and also a 'theory of mind' of the other agents. In this paper we propose a cognitive agent model where norms are based on three dimensions. First, we distinguish between agents whose behavior is governed by norms and autonomous normative systems; we call the latter normative agents. Second, we distinguish some of the usual mental attitudes for all agents. Third, we distinguish between behavior that counts as a violation, and sanctions that are applied. The decisions of agents are based a qualitative decision theory extended with recursive modelling: an agent explicitly models the normative agent who monitors violations and applies sanctions. Our framework enables agents to reason also on what is permitted and on how permissions work as exceptions to behaviors which are considered violations and thus are punishable. }, Slides = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/cma03-slides.ps.Z}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/cma03.pdf} } @InProceedings{Boella-Torre:cola03, Title = {Attributing Mental Attitudes to Groups: Cooperation in a Qualitative Game Theory}, Author = {G. Boella and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Procs. of Collaboration Agents: Autonomous Agents for Collaborative Environments at WI/IAT'03 (COLA'03)}, Year = {2003}, Abstract = {We discuss a general model of cooperation among autonomous agents, based on a qualitative game theory. The basic elements of the model are the ability of agents to recursively model what their partners will do, and the idea that a group can be described as an agent whom goals and desires are attributed to: these represent the shared objective and the wish to save the members's resources. When the agents of the group take a decision they must adopt these goals and desires: if they don't do that, they are considered by the other members uncooperative and thus liable. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/cola03.pdf}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/cola03.pdf} } @InProceedings{Boella-Torre:kggi03, Title = {Access Control in Virtual Communities: Prohibition, Permission, Authorization and Delegation of Power in the Grid}, Author = {G. Boella and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Procs. of Knowledge Grid and Grid Intelligence workshop at WI/IAT'03 (KGGI'03)}, Year = {2003}, Abstract = {We are interested in the design of access control policies for virtual communities of agents based on the grid infrastructure. In a virtual community agents can play both the role of resource consumers and the role of resource providers, and they remain in control of their resources. We argue that this requirement imposes a distinction between the authorization to access a resource given by the virtual community and the permission to do so issued by the resource providers. Our model is based on a logical multiagent framework that distinguishes the three roles of resource consumption, provision, and of authorization. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/kggi03.pdf}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/kggi03.pdf} } @InProceedings{boellatorre:nrac-ijcai03, Title = {Permissions and Undercutters}, Author = {G. Boella and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Procs. of IJCAI Workshop on Non Monotonic Reasoning, Actions and Causality}, Year = {2003}, Address = {Acapulco}, Abstract = {Input/output logics have been proposed to formalize rule based inference. They are mainly inspired by deontic logic, or the logic of obligations, although it has also been shown that they generalize for example Reiter's normal default logic. A recent extension of the input/output logics formalizes various notions of permission. We are interested in the question whether input/ output logics can be used to formalize rule-based inferences as they occur in for example belief revision, default reasoning, argumentation, causal reasoning, et cetera, and in particular whether permissions correspond to notions in such inferences. In this paper, we discuss permissions and their role in deontic logic, and relate it to undercutters in argumentation theory. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/nrac03.pdf}, Slides = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/nrac03-slides.ps.Z}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/nrac03.pdf} } @InProceedings{BTV09a, Title = {Four Ways to Change Coalitions: Agents, Dependencies, Norms and Internal Dynamics}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert van der Torre and Serena villata}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of COIN}, Year = {2009}, Abstract = {We introduce a new formal approach to social networks in order to distinguish four ways in which coalitions change. First, the agents in the network change. Second, dependencies among the agents change, for example due to addition or removal of powers and goals of the agents. Third, norms can introduce normative dependencies for obligations and prohibitions. Fourth, coalitions can change due to internal processes. We propose a number of stability measures to identify each one of the four proposed sources of coalitions' dynamics and the consequences they induce on the stability of coalitions.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Url = {http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-494/coinpaper3.pdf} } @Article{DBLP:journals/aamas/BoellaTV08, Title = {Introduction to the special issue on normative multiagent systems}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert van der Torre and Harko Verhagen}, Journal = {Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems}, Year = {2008}, Number = {1}, Pages = {1-10}, Volume = {17}, Affiliation = {icr}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10458-008-9047-8}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10458-008-9047-8} } @Article{DBLP:journals/ao/BoellaTV07, Title = {Roles, an interdisciplinary perspective}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert van der Torre and Harko Verhagen}, Journal = {Applied Ontology}, Year = {2007}, Number = {2}, Pages = {81-88}, Volume = {2}, Abstract = {The notion of role is ubiquitous in many fields of computer science, like programming languages, software engineering, coordination languages, databases, multiagent systems, knowledge representation, formal ontology, computational linguistics, security, and conceptual modelling, and also outside computer science, like in cognitive science, organizational science and linguistics. In computer science, the discussion about roles started in the '70s with Bachman and Daya (1977), and, with a recurring trend, it comes back to the attention of the research community. Recently, roles have been used in many areas to handle interaction, for example, role based access control in security with the RBAC model (Sandhu et al. (1996)), collaboration roles in UML to describe the interaction among classes (Rumbaugh et al. (2004)), channels connecting components in coordination languages (Arbab (2003)), the separation of concerns to describe the interaction properties of objects in new contexts in programming languages, etc.With the rise of the internet, new communication possibilities and interactive computing created a new demand of research about roles, for example, in organizations in open multiagent systems, in role based programming languages, in using roles for the composition of web services, and in defining roles in standards for interoperability. Notwithstanding this revival of the research about the notion of role, little agreement seems possible among the proposals in the different fields. This lack of agreement leads to the impossibility of transferring the results from one area to the other, and even inside a single area, a consequence which is quite unpleasant in a moment where the sharing of knowledge and standardization represent an added value in many fields. For example, in ontology, the lack of a common definition of role constitutes a problem for the interconnection of different knowledge bases: the result is that a widely used ontology language like OWL does not consider roles as a primitive. In multiagent systems, the openness of systems highlights the need of commonly accepted definitions, but again without a common notion of role it is not possible for a new agent to become part of an organization to interact with other agents; and in programming languages, software reuse can be improved only by a more developed theory of how objects interact with each other basing on the roles they play. The likely reasons of these divergences are that many papers on the notion of role fail to have an interdisciplinary character, that much work proposes new definitions of roles to deal with particular practical problems, and that role seems an intuitive notion which can be grasped in its prototypical characters, but it is instead a deceptive one when details must be clarified. Few proposals, like Steimann (2000) or Masolo et al. (2004), have a more general attitude, and try to find a problem independent definition of role and to formalize it. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ao07.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Ee = {http://iospress.metapress.com/openurl.asp?genre=article{\&}issn=1570-5838{\&}volume=2{\&}issue=2{\&}spage=81}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ao07.pdf} } @Article{Boella-etal:cmot06b, Title = {Introduction to normative multiagent systems}, Author = {G. Boella and L. van der Torre and H. Verhagen}, Journal = {Computation and Mathematical Organizational Theory, Special issue on Normative Multiagent Systems}, Year = {2006}, Number = {2-3}, Pages = {71-79}, Volume = {12}, Abstract = {In this paper we use recursive modelling to formalize sanction-based obligations in a qualitative game theory. In particular, we formalize an agent who attributes mental attitudes such as goals and desires to the normative system which creates and enforces its obligations. The wishes (goals, desires) of the normative system are the commands (obligations) of the agent. Since the agent is able to reason about the normative system's behavior, our model accounts for many ways in which an agent can violate a norm believing that it will not be sanctioned. The theory can be used in theories or applications that need a model of rational decision making in normative multiagent systems, such as for example theories of fraud and deception, trust dynamics and reputation, electronic commerce, and virtual communities.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Url = {http://www.springerlink.com/content/9508t27tr9279617/} } @InProceedings{Boella-etal:aisb05, Title = {Introduction to Normative Multiagent Systems}, Author = {G. Boella and L. van der Torre and H. Verhagen}, Booktitle = {Procs. of NorMas Symposium at AISB'05}, Year = {2005}, Abstract = {In this paper we give a short introduction to the emerging area of normative multiagent systems by presenting definitions and examples.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/aisb05.pdf}, Date-modified = {2011-12-20 17:13:11 +0100}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/aisb05.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/prima/BoellaTV08, Title = {Social Viewpoints for Arguing about Coalitions}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert van der Torre and Serena Villata}, Booktitle = {Intelligent Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 11th Pacific Rim International Conference on Multi-Agents, PRIMA 2008, Hanoi, Vietnam, December 15-16, 2008. Proceedings}, Year = {2008}, Editor = {The Duy Bui and Tuong Vinh Ho and Quang-Thuy Ha}, Pages = {66-77}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {5357}, Abstract = {Frameworks for arguing about coalitions are based on non-monotonic logic and are therefore formal and abstract, whereas social theories about agent coalitions typically are based on conceptual modeling languages and therefore semi-formal and detailed. In this paper we bridge the gap between these two research areas such that social viewpoints can be used to argue about coalitions. We formally define three social viewpoints with abstraction and refinement relations among them, and we adapt an existing coalition argumentation theory to reason about the coalitions defined in the most abstract social viewpoint.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Date-modified = {2011-09-25 18:07:50 +0200}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-89674-6_10}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-89674-6_10} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/prima/BoellaTV08a, Title = {Changing Institutional Goals and Beliefs of Autonomous Agents}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert van der Torre and Serena Villata}, Booktitle = {Intelligent Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 11th Pacific Rim International Conference on Multi-Agents, PRIMA 2008, Hanoi, Vietnam, December 15-16, 2008. Proceedings}, Year = {2008}, Editor = {The Duy Bui and Tuong Vinh Ho and Quang-Thuy Ha}, Pages = {78-85}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {5357}, Abstract = {Agents are autonomous and thus their goals and beliefs can- not be changed by other agents or the environment, but from outside the agents we can change their institutional goals and beliefs, that is, the responsibilities and powers associated with their roles. In this paper, we introduce a model of institutional dynamics, where the dynamics of an institution is modeled by the creation or removal of responsibilities and powers. We illustrate the change of institutional goals and beliefs using a government scenario.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Date-modified = {2011-09-25 17:34:58 +0200}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-89674-6_11}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-89674-6_11} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/ht/BoellaTV09, Title = {Four measures for the dynamics of coalitions in social networks}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert van der Torre and Serena Villata}, Booktitle = {HYPERTEXT 2009, Proceedings of the 20th ACM Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia, Torino, Italy, June 29 - July 1, 2009}, Year = {2009}, Editor = {Ciro Cattuto and Giancarlo Ruffo and Filippo Menczer}, Pages = {361-362}, Publisher = {ACM}, Abstract = {We introduce four measures for the change of coalitions in social networks. The first one measures the change of the agents in the network over time, The second one measures the change of dependencies among the agents, due to addition or removal of powers and goals of the agents. The third one measures the change in normative dependencies like obligations and prohibitions introduced by norms. The fourth one measures changes in coalitions. If one of the first three measures is high, then the fourth measure is probably high too, if the change in agents and dependencies is a cause for a change in coalitions. If the first three measures are low, but the change in coalitions is high, it is due to internal processes like violations of the coalition agreements.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Date-modified = {2011-09-25 17:51:14 +0200}, Ee = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1557914.1557989}, ISBN = {978-1-60558-486-7}, Url = {http://dl.acm.org/authorize?190522} } @InProceedings{BTV10, Title = {Trust in Abstract Argumentation}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert van der Torre and Serena Villata}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the 4th Mahasarakham International Workshop on Artificial Intelligence (MIWAI'10)}, Year = {2010}, Abstract = {-}, Affiliation = {icr}, Date-modified = {2011-09-25 18:16:47 +0200}, Url = {http://publications.uni.lu/record/5685?ln=fr} } @InProceedings{BBTV09a, Title = {A Normative Multiagent Approach to Requirements Engineering}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert van der Torre and Serena Villata}, Booktitle = {Postproceedings COIN@AAMAS 2009}, Year = {2009}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {LNCS}, Abstract = {In this paper we present a new model for the requirements analysis of a system. We offer a conceptual model defined following a visual modeling language, called dependence networks. TROPOS [9] uses dependence networks in the requirements analysis, in this paper we propose to extend them with norms. This improvement allows to define a new type of dependence networks, called conditional dependence networks, representing a new modeling technique for the requirements analysis of the system. Our model, moreover, allows the definition of the notion of coalition depending on the different kinds of network. We present our model using the scenario of virtual organizations based on a Grid network.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/aamas09.pdf} } @InProceedings{BTV09b, Title = {A Normative Multiagent Approach to Requirements Engineering}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert van der Torre and Serena Villata}, Booktitle = {SNAMAS}, Year = {2009}, Abstract = {-}, Affiliation = {icr}, Date-modified = {2011-09-25 17:39:01 +0200}, Url = {http://publications.uni.lu/record/4046} } @Article{BTV09c, Title = {Analyzing Cooperation in Iterative Social Network Design}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert van der Torre and Serena Villata}, Journal = {Journal of Universal Computer}, Year = {2009}, Volume = {15(13)}, Abstract = {We introduce an approach to iteratively design `small' social networks used in software engineering together with methods analyzing the cooperation in the system. The degree of cooperation is measured by the emergence of coalitions and their stability over time. At the most abstract level, which we call the coalition view, coalitions are abstract entities that may dominate or attack other coalitions. During iterative design, these abstract entities are refined with agents and their dependencies constituting the coalitions (dependence view), the powers of sets of agents to see to goals (power view) and finally the beliefs, plans, tasks and goals of agents (agent view). The analysis methods predict the emergence of coalitions based on reciprocity and argumentation theory.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Page = {2676-2700}, Url = {http://www.jucs.org/jucs_15_13/analyzing_cooperation_in_iterative} } @InProceedings{BTV09e, Title = {On the Acceptability of Meta-Arguments}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert van der Torre and Serena Villata}, Booktitle = {IAT 2009: Procs. of IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Intelligent Agent Technology}, Year = {2009}, Pages = {259-262}, Publisher = {IEEE}, Abstract = {In this paper we introduce a theory of meta-argumentation, by using Dung's theory of abstract argumentation to reason about itself. Meta-arguments are generated from atomic arguments, and extensions of acceptable meta-arguments are based on Dung's argumentation semantics. To illustrate our theory, we show how to represent Toulmin schemes in this theory by introducing meta-arguments using the Caminada labeling, and meta- arguments for support.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Url = {http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs_all.jsp?arnumber=5284833} } @InProceedings{boella:saso08, Title = {Self Adaptive Coalitions in Multiagent Systems}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert van der Torre and Serena Villata}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the 2nd IEEE International Conference on Self-Adaptive and Self-Organizing Systems (SASO 2008)}, Year = {2008}, Pages = {461-462}, Publisher = {IEEE}, Abstract = {Coalitions are usually deÞned with respect to a static framework of dependencies among agents. In this paper we propose a dynamic view of dependence networks to en- able dynamic coalitions which can self adapt to a situation by exploiting the possibility to trigger other agents' goals.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/saso08.pdf} } @InProceedings{BT07d, Title = {Power in Norm Negotiation}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert W.N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Agent and Multi-Agent Systems: Technologies and Applications, First KES International Symposium, KES-AMSTA 2007, Wroclaw, Poland, May 31 -- June 1, 2007, Proceedings}, Year = {2007}, Editor = {Ngoc Thanh Nguyen and Adam Grzech and Robert J. Howlett and Lakhmi C. Jain}, Note = {Best paper award}, Pages = {436-446}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {4496}, Abstract = {In social mechanism design, norm negotiation creates individual or contractual obligations fulfilling goals of the agents. The social delegation cycle distinguishes among social goal negotiation, obligation and sanction negotiation and norm acceptance. Power may affect norm negotiation in various ways, and we therefore introduce a new formalization of the social delegation cycle based on power and dependence, without referring to the rule structure of norms, actions, decision variables, tasks, and so on. }, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/kesamsta07.pdf}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/kesamsta07.pdf} } @InProceedings{BT07e, Title = {A Game-Theoretic Approach to Normative Multi-Agent Systems}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert W.N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Normative Multi-agent Systems}, Year = {2007}, Abstract = {In this paper we study game-theoretic foundations for norms. We assume that a norm is a mechanism to obtain desired multi-agent system behavior, and must therefore under normal or typical circumstances be fulfilled by a range of agent types, such as norm internalizing agents, respectful agents fulfilling norms if possible, and selfish agents obeying norms only due to the associated sanctions.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/normas07a.pdf} } @InProceedings{BTV07, Title = {Introduction to Normative Multiagent Systems}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert W.N. van der Torre and Harko Verhagen}, Booktitle = {Normative Multi-agent Systems}, Year = {2007}, Abstract = {This article introduces the research issues related to and definition of normative multiagent systems. It also describes the papers selected from NorMAS05 that are part of this double special issue and relates the papers to each other. }, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/cmot06.pdf}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/cmot06.pdf} } @Article{DBLP:journals/ail/BoellaT07, Title = {The ontological properties of social roles in multi-agent systems: definitional dependence, powers and roles playing roles}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Journal = {Artif. Intell. Law}, Year = {2007}, Number = {3}, Pages = {201-221}, Volume = {15}, Abstract = {In this paper we address the problem of defining social roles in MAS. Social roles provide the basic structure of social institutions and organizations. We start from the properties attributed to roles both in the MAS and the Object Oriented community, and we use them in an ontological analysis of the notion of social role. We thus identify as the main properties of social roles being definitionally dependent on the institution they belong to, attributing powers to the agents playing them, and allowing roles to play roles. The methodology we use to model roles is the agent metaphor: social roles, in the same way as social institutions, like normative systems and organizations, are attributed mental attitudes to explain their behavior.}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Date-modified = {2011-09-25 18:15:22 +0200}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10506-007-9030-8}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10506-007-9030-8} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/icail/BoellaT03, Title = {Rational Norm Creation}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {ICAIL}, Year = {2003}, Pages = {81-82}, Abstract = {If a legislator introduces a new norm in a normative system, then rationality prescribes that it ensures that the norm can and will be fulfilled by agents subjected to the norm. Since agents may not follow the law, it associates sanctions with norms. But even with sanction-based obligations, some agents will look for ways to violate the norm while at the same time evading the sanction, for example by making sure that their violation will not be noticed, blocking the sanction, bribing the system, et cetera. Consequently, to reason about the creation of norms, we need a model of norm-evading agents. In [2] we argue that a model of norm-evading agents can be based on the attribution of mental attitudes to normative systems. In this paper we address the following two questions: How can the attribution of mental attitudes to norma-tive systems be used to reason about norm creation? How can we formalize norm creation using the attri-bution of mental attitudes to normative systems?}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, File = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/icail03b.pdf}, Url = {http://dl.acm.org/authorize?859346} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/icail/BoelleT03, Title = {Permissions and Obligations in Hierarchical Normative Systems}, Author = {Guido Boella and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {ICAIL}, Year = {2003}, Pages = {109-118}, Abstract = {In this paper we discuss different types of permissions and their roles in deontic logic. We study the distinction between weak and strong permissions in the context of input/output logic, combining the logic with constraints, priorities and hierarchies of normative authorities. In this setting we observe that the notion of prohibition immunity no longer applies, and we introduce a new notion of permission as exception and a new distinction between static and dynamic norms. We show that strong permissions can dynamically change a normative system by adding exceptions to obligations, provide an explicit representation of what is permitted to the subjects of the normative system and allow higher level authorities to limit the changes that lower level authorities can do to the normative system. }, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, File = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/icail03a.pdf}, Url = {http://dl.acm.org/authorize?859450} } @Article{DBLP:journals/corr/BoothGKRT14, Title = {Abduction and Dialogical Proof in Argumentation and Logic Programming}, Author = {Richard Booth and Dov M. Gabbay and Souhila Kaci and Tjitze Rienstra and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Journal = {CoRR}, Year = {2014}, Volume = {abs/1407.3896}, Bibsource = {dblp computer science bibliography, http://dblp.org}, Biburl = {http://dblp.uni-trier.de/rec/bib/journals/corr/BoothGKRT14}, Timestamp = {Tue, 07 Apr 2015 21:05:14 +0200}, Url = {http://arxiv.org/abs/1407.3896} } @Other{10993/10405, Title = {A logical theory about dynamics in abstract argumentation}, Author = {Booth, R. and Kaci, S. and Rienstra, T. and van der Torre, L.}, Timestamp = {2015.01.26}, Year = {2013} } @Other{10993/10410, Title = {Monotonic and non-monotonic inference for abstract argumentation}, Author = {Booth, R. and Kaci, S. and Rienstra, T. and van der Torre, L.}, Timestamp = {2015.01.26}, Year = {2013} } @Other{10993/10325, Title = {Conditional acceptance functions}, Author = {Booth, R. and Kaci, S. and Rienstra, T. and van der Torre, L.}, Timestamp = {2015.01.26}, Year = {2012} } @InProceedings{booth-etal:nmr06, Title = {Merging Rules: Preliminary Version}, Author = {R. Booth and S. Kaci and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the NMR'06}, Year = {2006}, Abstract = {In this paper we consider the merging of rules or conditionals. In contrast to other approaches, we do not invent a new approach from scratch, for one particular kind of rule, but we are interested in ways to generalize existing revision and merging operators from belief merging to rule merging. First, we study ways to merge rules based on only a notion of consistency of a set of rules, and illustrate this approach using a consolidation operator of Booth and Richter. Second, we consider ways to merge rules based on a notion of implication among rules, and we illustrate this approach using socalled min and max merging operators defined using possibilistic logic.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/nmr06c.pdf}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/nmr06c.pdf} } @Article{BJLTT07, Title = {Formal analysis of trace conditioning}, Author = {T. Bosse and C.M. Jonker and S.A. Los and L. van der Torre and J. Treur}, Journal = {Cognitive Systems Research Journal}, Year = {2007}, Number = {1}, Pages = {36-47}, Volume = {8}, Abstract = {In the literature classical conditioning is usually described and analysed informally. If formalisation is used, this is often based on mathematical models based on difference or differential equations. This paper explores a formal description and analysis of the process of trace conditioning, based on logical specification and analysis methods of dynamic properties of the process. Specific types of dynamic properties are global dynamic properties, describing properties of the process as a whole, or local dynamic properties, describing properties of basic steps in a conditioning process. If the latter type of properties are specified in an executable format, they provide a temporal declarative specification of a simulation model. By a software environment these local properties can be used to actually perform simulation. Global properties can be checked automatically for simulated or other traces. Using these methods the properties of conditioning processes informally expressed by Los and Van Den Heuvel (2001) have been formalised and verified against a specification of local properties based on Machado (1997)'s differential equation model.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Url = {http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389041706000593} } @InProceedings{Bosse-etal:AOSE05, Title = {Formalisation and Analysis of the Temporal Dynamics of Conditioning}, Author = {T. Bosse and C. Jonker and S. Los and L. van der Torre and J. Treur}, Booktitle = {Agent-Oriented Software Engineering VI}, Year = {2006}, Pages = {54-68}, Series = {LNCS}, Volume = {3950}, Abstract = {In order to create adaptive Agent Systems with abilities matching those of their biological counterparts, a natural approach is to incorporate classical conditioning mechanisms into such systems. However, existing models for classical conditioning are usually based on differential equations. Since the design of Agent Systems is traditionally based on qualitative conceptual languages, these differential equations are often not directly appropriate to serve as an input for Agent System design. To deal with this problem, this paper explores a formal description and analysis of a conditioning process based on logical specification and analysis methods of dynamic properties of conditioning. Specific types of dynamic properties are global properties, describing properties of the process as a whole, or local properties, describing properties of basic steps in a conditioning process. If the latter type of properties are specified in an executable format, they provide a temporal declarative specification of a simulation model. Global properties can be checked automatically for simulated or other traces. Using these methods the properties of conditioning processes informally expressed by Los and Heuvel [8] have been formalised and verified against a specification of local properties based on Machado [9]'s mathematical model.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Url = {http://www.springerlink.com/content/q991445n03h1065w/} } @Other{10993/14537, Title = {Normative Reasoning and Consequence}, Author = {Broersen, J. and Cranefield, S. and Elrakaiby, Y. and Gabbay, D. M. and Grossi, D. and Lorini, E. and Parent, X. and van der Torre, L. and Tummolini, L. and Turrini, P. and Schwarzentruber, F.}, Publisher = {Springer Netherlands}, Timestamp = {2015.01.26}, Year = {2013} } @InProceedings{BroersenDastaniHunagHulstijnTorreBNAIC2001, Title = {An alternative classification of agent types based on {BOID} conflict resolution}, Author = {J.M. Broersen and M. Dastani and Z. Huang and J. Hulstijn and Torre, L.W.N. van der}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the 13th Belgium-Netherlands Artificial Intelligence Conference}, Year = {2001}, Editor = {B. Kr\"{o}se and Rijke, M. de and G. Schreiber and Someren, M. van }, Pages = {79--87}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/bnaic01b.ps.Z} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/agents/BroersenDHHT01, Title = {The {BOID} architecture: conflicts between beliefs, obligations, intentions and desires}, Author = {Jan Broersen and Mehdi Dastani and Joris Hulstijn and Zhisheng Huang and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Agents}, Year = {2001}, Pages = {9-16}, Abstract = {In this paper we introduce the so-called Beliefs-Obligations-Intentions-Desires or BOID architecture. It contains feedback loops to consider all effects of actions before committing to them, and conflict resolution mechanisms to resolve conflicts between the outputs of its four components. Agent types such as realistic or social correspond to conflict resolution types embedded in the BOID architecture. }, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Ee = {http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=375735.375766}, Url = {http://dl.acm.org/authorize?94633} } @Article{Broersen2002, Title = {Goal generation in the {BOID} architecture}, Author = {Broersen, J. and Dastani, M. and Hulstijn, J. and van der Torre, L.}, Journal = {Cognitive Science Quarterly}, Year = {2002}, Number = {3-4}, Pages = {428--447}, Volume = {2}, Abstract = {In this paper we consider goal generation in cognitive agent architectures. We show how goal generation can be described in terms of interaction between mental attitudes biased by agent types such as realistic, social, selfish and stable. We introduce a generic BOID architecture and agent type specific BOID architectures, in which goals are generated from conditional beliefs, obligations, intentions and desires. We implement the BOID architectures by relating conditional mental attitudes to components, goal generation to extension construction, and agent types to constraints on priority functions. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/csqj02.ps.Z}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/csqj02.ps.Z} } @Article{broersen2002goal, Title = {Goal generation in the BOID architecture}, Author = {Broersen, J. and Dastani, M. and Hulstijn, J. and van der Torre, L.}, Journal = {Cognitive Science Quarterly}, Year = {2002}, Number = {3-4}, Pages = {428--447}, Volume = {2}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/csqj02.pdf} } @InProceedings{Broersen03bdioctl:, Title = {BDIO CTL: Properties of obligation in agent specification languages}, Author = {J Broersen and M Dastani and L van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of IJCAI’03}, Year = {2003}, Pages = {1389--1390}, Abstract = {Recently several agent architectures have been proposed that incorporate obligations. However, agent specification or verification languages that take obligations into account have received less attention. Our research question is how properties involving obligations can be specified or verified in an extension of Rao and Georgeff's BDICTL. In Section 2 we extend BDICTL with so-called Standard Deontic Logic, and in Section 2 and 3 we introduce various single agent and multiagent properties.}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ijcai03b.pdf} } @InProceedings{BroersenDastaniTorre2002, Title = {Relating functionality descriptions to proof rules of input/output logic.}, Author = {J.M. Broersen and M. Dastani and L.W.N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of BNAIC 2002}, Year = {2002}, Pages = {27-34}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/bnaic02c.ps} } @InProceedings{Torre01WishFul, Title = {Wishful thinking}, Author = {Broersen, J. and Dastani, M. and van der Torre, L.}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of DGNMR01}, Year = {2001}, Abstract = {In this paper Reiter's default logic is used to study con icts between conditional beliefs and desires in Thomason's BDP and Broersen et.al's BOID architecture. In these architectures resolving a con ict is formalized through selection of a subset of the conditionals that does not derive an inconsistency, which is analogous to selecting a subset of rules in input-output logic and selecting an extension in Reiter's default logic. We introduce and discuss several desiderata for this selection process, and we study whether they are satised by two specic denitions for belief-desire extensions. 1.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/dgnmr01.ps}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/dgnmr01.ps} } @InProceedings{Torre2000LeveledCommitment, Title = {Leveled commitment and trust in negotiation}, Author = {Broersen, J. and Dastani, M. and van der Torre, L.}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the Autonomous Agents 2000 Workshop on Deception, Fraud and Trust in Agent Societies, Barcelona}, Year = {2000}, Pages = {13-20}, Abstract = {As agents become more autonomous, agent negotiation and motivational attitudes such as commitment and trust become more important. In this paper we consider the important choice in advanced negotiation applications whether negotiation parameters – such as cardinality of interaction, agent attitude, and agent architectures – are incorporated in the negotiation protocol or in the negotiation strategy. Only in the first case parameters are fixed and agents do not have to reason about them when they choose their strategy. We define a dynamic deontic logic which can also be used for the second case, because it models concepts like leveled commitment and trust. For example, it formalizes that violating commitments leads to a decrease in trustworthiness.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/fraud00.ps.Z}, Date-modified = {2011-12-20 17:13:06 +0100}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/fraud00.ps.Z} } @Article{DBLP:journals/ijis/BroersenDT05, Title = {Beliefs, obligations, intentions, and desires as components in an agent architecture}, Author = {Jan Broersen and Mehdi Dastani and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Journal = {Int. J. Intell. Syst.}, Year = {2005}, Number = {9}, Pages = {893-919}, Volume = {20}, Abstract = {In this paper we discuss how cognitive attitudes like beliefs, obligations, intentions and desires can be represented as components with input/output functionality. We study how to break down an agent specification into a specification of individual components and a specification of their coordination. A typical property discussed at the individual component specification level is whether the input is included in the output, and a typical property discussed at the coordination level is whether beliefs override desires to ensure realism. At the individual level we show how proof rules of so-called input/output logics correspond to properties of functionality descriptions, and at the coordination level we show how global constraints coordinating the components formalize coherence properties. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ijis05.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/int.20098}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ijis05.pdf} } @Article{DBLP:journals/jancl/BroersenDT02, Title = {Realistic desires}, Author = {Jan Broersen and Mehdi Dastani and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Journal = {Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics}, Year = {2002}, Number = {2}, Pages = {287-308}, Volume = {12}, Abstract = {Realism for agents with unconditional beliefs, desires and intentions (BDI agents) has been analyzed in modal logic. This paper provides a logical analysis of realism for agents with conditional beliefs and desires in a rule based approach analogous to Reiter's default logic. We distinguish two types of realism, which we call `a priori' and `a posteriori' realism. We analyze whether these two new properties are compatible with other properties discussed in the literature, such as existence of extensions. We show that Reiter's default logic is too strong, in the sense that a weaker notion of maximality of extensions is needed to satisfy realism. Finally we show that several existing approaches do not satisfy the new realism properties, and we introduce a new construction that does satisfy them. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/jancl02.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/jancl02.pdf} } @InProceedings{broersen:ecai08, Title = {Conditional norms and dyadic obligations in time}, Author = {Jan Broersen and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of Eighteenth European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI2008)}, Year = {2008}, Abstract = {Reasoning about norm violation and time is of central concern to the regulation of multi-agent system behavior. Here we continue work in [2] on an approach to reasoning about norms, obligations, time and agents, involving three main ingredients. First, we assume a branch- ing temporal structure representing the change of propositions over time. Second, we use an algorithm that, given the input of the branch- ing temporal structure and a set of norms, produces an `obligation la- beling' of the temporal structure. Finally, we reason about the norms represented by these deontically labeled temporal structures to deter- mine norm redundancy and equivalence of normative systems. We distinguish between conditional norms and conditional obli- gations. General directives like ''if an agent receives a request, it has to accept or reject within five seconds'' are conditional norms. We interpret norms by defining which conditional and/or temporal obli- gations they give rise to. For example, if at any moment in time for which the norm is in force, the agent receives a request, then for the following five seconds, if it has not accepted or rejected the request yet, it has the obligation to do so. So, norms `detach' obligations. The deontic logic literature distinguishes between so-called factual and deontic detachment [5]. The former is based on a match between the condition of the norm and the facts, and the latter is based on a match between the condition and the obligations.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Date-modified = {2011-12-20 17:44:32 +0100}, Url = {http://www.booksonline.iospress.nl/Content/View.aspx?piid=10141} } @InProceedings{BroT07, Title = {Reasoning About Norms, Obligations, Time and Agents}, Author = {Jan Broersen and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {PRIMA}, Year = {2007}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Abstract = {Reasoning about norms and time is of central concern to the regulation or control of the behavior of a multiagent system. In this paper we introduce a representation of normative systems that distinguishes between norms and the detached obligations of agents over time, leading to a simple and therefore practical way to reason about norms, obligations, time and agents. We consider the reasoning tasks to determine whether a norm is redundant in a normative system and whether two normative systems are equivalent. In the former case the redundant norm might be removed. In the latter case one norm might be replaced by the other. It is well known that properties concerning iterated or deontic detachment no longer hold when reasoning with multiple agents or with obligations over time. Yet, earlier approaches to reasoning about norms rarely consider the intricacies of time. We show how norms can be used to define the persistence of obligations of agents over time. We illustrate our approach by discussing three ways to relate norms and obligations of agents over time. Also we show how these three ways can be characterized.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Url = {http://www.springerlink.com/content/n4lr10j340285136/} } @Article{DBLP:journals/ail/BroersenT03, Title = {What an Agent Ought To Do}, Author = {Jan Broersen and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Journal = {Artif. Intell. Law}, Year = {2003}, Number = {1}, Pages = {45-61}, Volume = {11}, Abstract = {John Horty s book Agency and Deontic Logic appeared at Oxford University Press in 2001. It develops deontic logic against the background of a theory of agency in non-deterministic time. Several philosophical reviews of the book appeared since then (Bartha 2002; Czelakowski 2002; Danielsson 2002; McNamara 2003; Wansing 2003). Our goal is to present the book to a general AI audience that is familiar with action theories developed in AI, classical decision theory (Savage 1954), or formalizations of temporal reasoning like Computation Tree Logic (CTL) (Clarke et al. 1986; Emerson 1990). Therefore, in contrast to the philosophical reviews, we discuss and explain several key examples in the book. We do not explicitly discuss the relevance for AI and law, because the book itself is not concerned with the application of the theory to the legal domain. However, the relevance of deontic logic and normative reasoning for legal reasoning is well established by a number of publications on deontic logic in AI and law, see for example the special issue of this journal on agents and norms (volume 4, 1999). }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://ipsapp009.kluweronline.com/content/getfile/4521/18/4/abstract.htm}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/B:ARTI.0000013352.63798.08}, Url = {http://ipsapp009.kluweronline.com/content/getfile/4521/18/4/abstract.htm} } @Article{DBLP:journals/cj/CaireT10, Title = {Convivial Ambient Technologies: Requirements, Ontology and Design}, Author = {Patrice Caire and Leendert van der Torre}, Journal = {Comput. J.}, Year = {2010}, Number = {8}, Pages = {1229-1256}, Volume = {53}, Abstract = {In this paper we discuss the use of the social concept `conviviality' for computer science in general, and for the development of ambient technologies in particular. First, we give a survey of the use of the concept `conviviality' in the social sciences. Conviviality is usually considered a positive concept related to sociability. However, further analysis reveals a negative side related to lack of diversity, privacy and ethical issues. Second, we argue that conviviality requirements for ambient intelligence are challenging, because ambient technologies give rise to a new virtual and social reality, and conviviality issues play a central role in applications that are concerned with the interaction of material, virtual and social realities. Conviviality highlights an important challenge that we illustrate with examples that emphasize ethical issues, such as privacy threats, surveillance of users and identity theft. Intelligent interfaces, for example, allow instant interactions and thereby create strong needs for coordination and regulation mechanisms that have to be addressed to ensure the safeguard of individuals against abuses, such as privacy intrusions and identity manipulations. Third, we propose a conviviality ontology by operationalizing the fuzzy concept of `conviviality,' such that it can be used in computer science in the same way as other social concepts such as `service,' `contract' or `trust' are used in this area. Conviviality is defined using dependence networks, and tools for conviviality are based on, what we call, conviviality masks. Fourth, we illustrate how convivial ambient intelligence applications can be designed using our operationalized concept of conviviality. We illustrate our arguments and contributions with a running example on the use of ambient technologies in digital cities, as a prototypical example where material reality such as ambient technologies interacts with virtual and social realities.}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/comjnl/bxp012}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/comjnl/bxp012} } @Article{CaiTor09a, Title = {Convivial ambient technologies: Requirements, ontology, and design}, Author = {Patrice Caire and Leendert van der Torre}, Journal = {The Computer Journal}, Year = {2009}, Volume = {3}, Abstract = {In this paper we discuss the use of the social concept `conviviality' for computer science in general, and for the development of ambient technologies in particular. First, we give a survey of the use of the concept `conviviality' in the social sciences. Conviviality is usually considered a positive concept related to sociability. However, further analysis reveals a negative side related to lack of diversity, privacy and ethical issues. Second, we argue that conviviality requirements for ambient intelligence are challenging, because ambient technologies give rise to a new virtual and social reality, and conviviality issues play a central role in applications that are concerned with the interaction of material, virtual and social realities. Conviviality highlights an important challenge that we illustrate with examples that emphasize ethical issues, such as privacy threats, surveillance of users and identity theft. Intelligent interfaces, for example, allow instant interactions and thereby create strong needs for coordination and regulation mechanisms that have to be addressed to ensure the safeguard of individuals against abuses, such as privacy intrusions and identity manipulations. Third, we propose a conviviality ontology by operationalizing the fuzzy concept of `conviviality,' such that it can be used in computer science in the same way as other social concepts such as `service,' `contract' or `trust' are used in this area. Conviviality is defined using dependence networks, and tools for conviviality are based on, what we call, conviviality masks. Fourth, we illustrate how convivial ambient intelligence applications can be designed using our operationalized concept of conviviality. We illustrate our arguments and contributions with a running example on the use of ambient technologies in digital cities, as a prototypical example where material reality such as ambient technologies interacts with virtual and social realities.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/pubs/cai09c.pdf}, Date-modified = {2011-09-25 17:41:59 +0200}, Url = {http://comjnl.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/bxp012?ijkey=XL7Chngqlvz7MnJ&keytype=ref} } @InProceedings{CaiTor09b, Title = {Temporal Dependence Networks for the Design of Convivial Multiagent Systems}, Author = {Patrice Caire and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the Eighth International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, AAMAS}, Year = {2009}, Pages = {1317-1318}, Abstract = {We show how to use TROPOS as a design methodology for con- vivial multi-agent systems. We introduce temporal dependence networks to measure the evolution of conviviality over time, and we compare them to dynamic dependence networks introduced for conviviality masks and internal dynamics.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/pubs/cai09a}, Date-modified = {2011-09-25 18:13:18 +0200}, Location = {Budapest, Hungary}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/pubs/cai09a} } @InProceedings{CaiTor09c, Title = {The Design of Convivial Multiagent Systems}, Author = {Patrice Caire and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Social Networks and Multiagent Systems symposium; Artificial Intelligence and Simulation of Behaviour, AISB}, Year = {2009}, Abstract = {In this paper, we consider the design of convivial multi-agent systems. Conviviality has recently been proposed as a social concept to develop multi-agent systems. In this paper we introduce temporal dependence networks to model the evolution of dependence networks and conviviality over time, we introduce epistemic dependence networks to combine the viewpoints of stakeholders, and we introduce normative dependence networks to model the transformation of social dependencies by hiding power relations and social structures to facilitate social interactions. We show how to use these visual languages in design, and we illustrate the design method using an example on virtual children adoptions.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Date-modified = {2011-09-25 18:14:48 +0200}, Location = {Edinburgh, UK}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/CaiTor09c.pdf} } @InProceedings{CaiTor09d, Title = {A Conviviality Measure for Early Requirement Phase of Multiagent System Design}, Author = {Patrice Caire and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Normative Multiagent Systems}, Year = {2009}, Abstract = {In this paper, we consider the design of convivial multi-agent systems. Conviviality has recently been proposed as a social concept to develop multi-agent systems. In this paper we introduce temporal dependence networks to model the evolution of dependence networks and conviviality over time, we introduce epistemic dependence networks to combine the viewpoints of stakeholders, and we introduce normative dependence networks to model the transformation of social dependencies by hiding power relations and social structures to facilitate social interactions. We show how to use these visual languages in design, and we illustrate the design method using an example on virtual children adoptions.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Date-modified = {2011-12-21 13:25:50 +0100}, Location = {Dagstuhl, Germany}, Url = {http://drops.dagstuhl.de/opus/volltexte/2009/1899/pdf/09121.CairePatrice.Paper.1899.pdf} } @Other{10993/15845, Title = {Combining Norms, Roles, Dependence and Argumentation in Agreement Technologies.}, Abstract = {A major challenge for Agreement Technologies is the combination of existing technologies and rea- soning methods. In this paper we focus on the three core layers of the Agreement Technologies tower, called Norms, Organization and Argumentation. We present a framework for arguing about agreements based on norms, roles and dependence, together with a case study from the sharing economy.}, Author = {Caire, P. and van der Torre, L. and Villata, S.}, Timestamp = {2015.01.26}, Year = {2013} } @Article{10993/3835, Title = {Argumentation Theoretic Foundations for Abstract Dependence Networks}, Author = {Caire, P. and van der Torre, L. and Villata, S.}, Year = {2013}, Abstract = {In this paper we show how to argue about agreements based on de- pendence. First, we introduce a formal theory of arguing about agreements by instantiating Dung\text{'}s abstract theory of argumentation with proposals for agree- ments represented as dependence networks. Second, we show that acceptable agreements are exchange based\text{---}satisfying the so-called do-ut-des principle\text{---} and not redundant. Third, to further decrease the number of proposals, we define a notion of minimal proposals. Roughly, all proposals can be split into a number of minimal sub-proposals such that if the proposal is acceptable, then its minimal sub-proposals are acceptable too. We show that minimal proposals satisfy the indecomposable do-ut-des property, i.e., they cannot be split into two nonempty sub-proposals with at most one shared agent.}, Timestamp = {2015.01.26} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/atal/CaireVBT08, Title = {Conviviality masks in multiagent systems}, Author = {Patrice Caire and Serena Villata and Guido Boella and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {7th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2008), Estoril, Portugal, May 12-16, 2008, Volume 3}, Year = {2008}, Editor = {Lin Padgham and David C. Parkes and J{\"o}rg M{\"u}ller and Simon Parsons}, Pages = {1265-1268}, Publisher = {IFAAMAS}, Abstract = {In this paper we study tools for conviviality to develop user-friendly multiagent systems. First, we show how to use the social-cognitive concept of conviviality in multiagent system technology by relating it to agent power and social dependence networks. Second, we define conviviality masks as transformations of social dependencies by hiding power relations and social structures to facilitate social interactions. Third, we introduce dynamic dependence networks to model the creation of conviviality using conviviality masks. We illustrate the use of conviviality masks with a multiagent teleconferencing application for virtual worlds.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/pubs/cai08a.pdf}, Date-modified = {2011-09-25 17:43:03 +0200}, ISBN = {978-0-9817381-2-3}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/pubs/cai08a.pdf} } @Other{10993/12970, Title = {Abstract Normative Systems: Semantics and Proof Theory}, Abstract = {In this paper we introduce an abstract theory of normative reasoning, whose central notion is the generation of obligations, permissions and institutional facts from conditional norms. We present various semantics and their proof systems. The theory can be used to classify and compare new candidates for standards of normative reasoning, and to explore more elaborate forms of normative reasoning than studied thus far.}, Author = {Colombo Tosatto, S. and Boella, G. and van der Torre, L. and Villata, S.}, Timestamp = {2015.01.26}, Year = {2012} } @Other{10993/12977, Title = {Visualizing Normative Systems: an Abstract Approach}, Abstract = {Abstract normative systems allow to reason with norms even when their content is not detailed. In this paper, we propose a our preliminary results to visualize abstract normative systems, in such a way that we are able to reason with institutional facts, obligations and permissions. Moreover, we detect meaningful patterns emerging from the proposed visualization, and we show how these patterns can be used to define commonly used reusable solutions.}, Author = {Colombo Tosatto, S. and Boella, G. and van der Torre, L. and Villata, S.}, Publisher = {Springer}, Timestamp = {2015.01.26}, Year = {2012} } @Other{10993/12968, Title = {Algorithms for Basic Compliance Problems}, Abstract = {The present paper focuses on the problems of verifying compliance for global achievement and maintenance obligations. We first introduce the elements needed to identify and study compliance to these two classes of obligations in processes. Additionally, we define procedures and algorithms to efficiently deal with the identified compliance problem. We finally show that both algorithms proposed in the paper belong to the complexity class P.}, Author = {Colombo Tosatto, S. and El Kharbili, M. and Governatori, G. and Kelsen, P. and Ma, Q. and van der Torre, L.}, Timestamp = {2015.01.26}, Year = {2013} } @Article{10993/19556, Title = {Algorithms for tractable compliance problems}, Author = {Colombo Tosatto, S. and Kelsen, P. and Ma, Q. and el Kharbili, M. and Governatori, G. and van der Torre, L.}, Year = {2015}, Abstract = {In general the problem of verifying whether a structured business process is compliant with a given set of regulations is NP-hard. The present paper focuses on identifying a tractable subset of this problem, namely verifying whether a structured business process is compliant with a single global obligation. Global obligations are those whose validity spans for the entire execution of a business process. We identify two types of obligations: achievement and maintenance.\text{[D?]}In the present paper we firstly define an abstract framework capable to model the problem and secondly we define procedures and algorithms to deal with the compliance problem of checking the compliance of a structured business process with respect to a single global obligation. We show that the algorithms proposed in the paper run in polynomial time.}, Publisher = {Higher Education Press and Springer}, Timestamp = {2015.01.26} } @InProceedings{DGRST07, Title = {Contextual Agent Deliberation in Defeasible Logic}, Author = {Mehdi Dastani and Guido Governatori and Antonino Rotolo and Insu Song and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {PRIMA}, Year = {2007}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Abstract = {This article extends Defeasible Logic to deal with the contextual deliberation process of cognitive agents. First, we introduce meta-rules to reason with rules. Meta-rules are rules that have as a consequent rules for motivational components, such as obligations, intentions and desires. In other words, they include nested rules. Second, we introduce explicit preferences among rules. They deal with complex structures where nested rules can be involved.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/prima2007.pdf} } @InProceedings{Torre2000DynamicDesires, Title = {Dynamic desires}, Author = {Dastani, M. and Huang, Z. and van der Torre, L.}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the ICMAS2000 Workshop on game-theoretic and decision-theoretic approaches to agency (GTDT 2000)}, Year = {2000}, Abstract = {Logics of desires, preferences and goals have recently been proposed in planning and agent theory. In this paper we use a dynamic logic with utilitarian goals and desires to discuss the relation between goals, desires and utilities. From a static point of view goals are defined using desires and beliefs, and desires are defined using the utility function and a context. The consequences for the dynamics are that utilities are the most stable, then desires, and goals change most often. We illustrate the use of the logic to formalize certain aspects of negotiation. In particular, we show how one agent can influence the behavior of another agent by influencing his desires. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/gtdt00book.ps.Z}, Date-modified = {2011-12-20 17:13:35 +0100}, Location = {Boston}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/gtdt00book.ps.Z} } @InProceedings{Torre01BDIandQDT, Title = {BDI and QDT: a comparison based on classical decision theory}, Author = {Dastani, M. and Hulstijn, J. and van der Torre, L.}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of AAAI Spring Symposium on Game Theoretic and Decision Theoretic Agents (GTDT2001)}, Year = {2001}, Pages = {16-26}, Publisher = {AAAI Press}, Abstract = {In this paper we compare Beliefs-Desire-Intention sys- tems (BDI systems) with Qualitative Decision Theory (QDT). Our analysis based on classical decision theory illustrates several issues where one area may profit from research in the other area. BDI has studied how inten- tions link subsequent decisions, whereas QDT has stud- ied methods to calculate candidate goals from desires, and how to derive intentions from goals. We also dis- cuss the role of goals and norms in both approaches.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/aaaiss01b.pdf}, Date-modified = {2011-12-20 17:14:40 +0100}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/aaaiss01b.pdf} } @InProceedings{Torre2000NegotiationProtocols, Title = {Negotiation protocols and dialogue games}, Author = {Dastani, M. and Hulstijn, J. and van der Torre, L.}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the Belgium/Dutch AI Conference (BNAIC'2000), Kaatsheuvel}, Year = {2000}, Pages = {13-20}, Abstract = {In a dynamic and open environment negotiation protocols cannot be known beforehand. We propose a methodology for constructing exible negotiation protocols based on joint actions and dialogue games. We view negotiation as a combination of joint actions. Simple dialogue games that consist of initiatives followed by responses function as `recipes for joint action' from which larger interactions can be constructed coherently.}, File = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/agents01b.ps}, Url = {http://dl.acm.org/authorize?06970} } @Article{DBLP:journals/eor/DastaniHT05, Title = {How to decide what to do?}, Author = {Mehdi Dastani and Joris Hulstijn and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Journal = {European Journal of Operational Research}, Year = {2005}, Number = {3}, Pages = {762-784}, Volume = {160}, Abstract = {There are many conceptualizations and formalizations of decision making. In this paper we compare classical decision theory with qualitative decision theory, knowledge-based systems and belief-desire-intention models developed in artificial intelligence and agent theory. They all contain representations of information and motivation. Examples of informational attitudes are probability distributions, qualitative abstractions of probabilities, knowledge, and beliefs. Examples of motivational attitudes are utility functions, qualitative abstractions of utilities, goals, and desires. Each of them encodes a set of alternatives to be chosen from. This ranges from a small predetermined set, a set of decision variables, through logical formulas, to branches of a tree representing events through time. Moreover, they have a way of formulating how a decision is made. Classical and qualitative decision theory focus on the optimal decisions represented by a decision rule. Knowledge-based systems and belief-desire-intention models focus on a model of the representations used in decision making, inspired by cognitive notions like belief, desire, goal and intention. Relations among these concepts express an agent type, which constrains the deliberation process. We also consider the relation between decision processes and intentions, and the relation between game theory and norms and commitments.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ejor03.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2003.06.038}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ejor03.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/agents/Dastani01, Title = {Negotiation protocols and dialogue games}, Author = {Mehdi Dastani and Joris Hulstijn and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Agents}, Year = {2001}, Pages = {180-181}, Abstract = {In a dynamic and open environment negotiation protocols can not be presumed to remain fixed. We propose a methodology for constructing flexible negotiation protocols based on joint actions and dialogue games. We view negotiation as a combination of joint actions. Simple dialogue games that consist of initiatives followed by responses function as `recipes for joint action' from which larger interactions can be constructed coherently. }, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Ee = {http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=375735.376092}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/bnaic00c.pdf} } @Article{Dastani_decisions, Title = {Decisions, Deliberation, and Agent Types CDT - QDT - BDI - 3APL - BOID}, Author = {Mehdi Dastani and Leendert van der Torre}, Journal = {Focus in Computer Science, Nova Science, 2005}, Year = {2005}, Abstract = {In this paper we investigate the relation between decisions, deliberation and agent types. In particular, we are interested how deliberation leads to decisions, and how agent types classify patterns of deliberation. We therefore consider Classical and Qualitative Decision Theories (CDT and QDT), the Beliefs-Desire-Intention (BDI) model, 3APL systems, and Belief-Obligation-Intention-Desire (BOID) systems. The first two are based on a decision rule which expresses a notion of rationality, whereas the latter three are based on deliberation processes and agent types.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/focus04.pdf}, Date-modified = {2011-12-20 17:13:48 +0100}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/focus04.pdf} } @InProceedings{Dastani2002, Title = {Decisions and games for BD agents}, Author = {Dastani, M. and van der Torre, L.}, Booktitle = {Game Theoretic and Decision Theoretic Agents (GTDT'02), Papers from the AAAI workshop, Technical Report WS-02-06}, Year = {2002}, Pages = {37-43}, Publisher = {AAAI Press}, Abstract = {Strategic games model the interaction between simultaneous decisions of a group of agents. The starting point of strategic games is a set of players (agents) having certain strategies (decisions) and preferences on the game's outcomes. In this paper we do not assume the set of decisions and preferences of agents to be given, but derive them from their mental attitudes.}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/aaai02.pdf} } @Article{dastani2002classification, Title = {A classification of cognitive agents}, Author = {Dastani, M. and van der Torre, L.}, Journal = {Proceedings of Cogsci02}, Year = {2002}, Pages = {256--261}, Abstract = {In this paper we discuss a generic component of a cognitive agent architecture that merges beliefs, obligations, intentions and desires into goals. The output of belief, obligation, intention and desire components may conflict and the way the conflicts are resolved determines the type of the agent. For component based cognitive agents, we introduce an alternative classification of agent types based on the order of output generation among components. This ordering determines the type of agents. Given four components, there are 24 distinct total orders and 144 distinct partial orders of output generation. These orders of output generation provide the space of possible types for the suggested component based cognitive agents. Some of these agent types correspond to well-known agent types such as realistic, social, and selfish, but most of them are new characterizing specific types of cognitive agents. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/cogsci02.ps}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/cogsci02.ps} } @InProceedings{Torre02WhatIsA, Title = {What is a normative goal?}, Author = {Dastani, M. and van der Torre, L.}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of RASTA'02, Bologna}, Year = {2002}, Abstract = {In this paper we are interested in developing goal-based normative agent ar- chitectures. We ask ourselves the question what a normative goal is. To answer this question we introduce a qualitative normative decision theory based on belief (B) and obligation (O) rules. We show that every agent which makes optimal deci- sions – which we call a BO rational agent – acts as if it is maximizing its achieved normative goals. This is the basis of our design of goal-based normative agents. }, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/WhatIsANormGoal.pdf} } @InProceedings{Torre02WhatIsAJoint, Title = {What is a Joint Goal?}, Author = {Dastani, M. and van der Torre, L.}, Booktitle = {Games with Beliefs and Defeasible Desires. Proceedings of NMR02, Toulouse}, Year = {2002}, Abstract = {In this paper we introduce a qualitative de- cision and game theory based on belief (B) and desire (D) rules. We show that a group of agents acts as if it is maximizing achieved joint goals.}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/nmr02.pdf} } @InProceedings{Torre2002DecisionsAndGames, Title = {Decisions and games for BD agents}, Author = {Dastani, M. and van der Torre, L.}, Booktitle = {Game Theoretic and Decision Theoretic Agents (GTDT'02), Papers from the AAAI workshop, Technical Report WS-02-06}, Year = {2002}, Pages = {37-43}, Publisher = {AAAI Press}, Abstract = {Strategic games model the interaction between simultaneous decisions of a group of agents. The starting point of strate- gic games is a set of players (agents) having certain strategies (decisions) and preferences on the game’s outcomes. In this paper we do not assume the set of decisions and preferences of agents to be given, but derive them from their mental at- titudes. In particular, we introduce a rule-based architecture for agents with beliefs and desires and explain how their de- cisions and preferences can be derived. We specify groups of such agents, define a mapping from their specification to the specification of the game they play, and use some familiar notions from game theory, such as Pareto efficiency and Nash equilibrium, to characterize the interaction between their de- cisions. We also discuss a reverse mapping from the specifi- cation of games that a group of agent play to the specifications of those agents. This mapping can be used to specify groups of agents that can play a ceratin game.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/gtdt02.pdf}, Date-modified = {2011-12-20 17:13:53 +0100}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/gtdt02.pdf} } @Other{10993/14502, Title = {A programming approach to monitoring communication in an organisational environment}, Author = {Dastani, M. and van der Torre, L. and Yorke-Smith, N.}, Timestamp = {2015.01.26}, Year = {2012} } @Article{DBLP:journals/corr/cs-MA-0207022, Title = {What is a Joint Goal? Games with Beliefs and Defeasible Desires}, Author = {Mehdi Dastani and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Journal = {CoRR}, Year = {2002}, Volume = {cs.MA/0207022}, Abstract = {In this paper we introduce a qualitative de- cision and game theory based on belief (B) and desire (D) rules. We show that a group of agents acts as if it is maximizing achieved joint goals.}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Ee = {http://arxiv.org/abs/cs.MA/0207022}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/corr02.pdf} } @InProceedings{firozabadi1998towards, Title = {Towards a formal analysis of control systems}, Author = {Firozabadi, B.S. and van der Torre, L.W.N.}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the ECAI}, Year = {1998}, Organization = {Citeseer}, Pages = {317--318}, Volume = {98}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ecai98yr1.ps.Z} } @InProceedings{Firozabadi98towardsa, Title = {Towards a Formal Analysis of Control Systems}, Author = {Babak Sadighi Firozabadi and Leendert W.N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {In Proceedings of the ECAI'98}, Year = {1998}, Pages = {317--318}, Publisher = {John Wiley and Sons, Ltd}, Abstract = {Formal models of electronic commerce represent and reason about security policies, for example for fraud detection and prevention. In this paper we propose a multi-layered formal model of information systems, that consists of a core system and several layers of control systems. The policies in these layers are formalized by obligations and actions of the involved parties. The formal models can be used for designing and analysing detective and preventative control systems.}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ecai98.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/ecai/FirozabadiT98, Title = {Formal Models of Control Systems}, Author = {Babak Sadighi Firozabadi and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {ECAI}, Year = {1998}, Pages = {317-318}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de} } @Article{DBLP:journals/logcom/FisherTDG14, Title = {Preface to the Special Issue on Computational Logic in Multi-Agent Systems {(CLIMA} {XIII)}}, Author = {Michael Fisher and Leendert W. N. van der Torre and Mehdi Dastani and Guido Governatori}, Journal = {J. Log. Comput.}, Year = {2014}, Number = {6}, Pages = {1251--1252}, Volume = {24}, Bibsource = {dblp computer science bibliography, http://dblp.org}, Biburl = {http://dblp.uni-trier.de/rec/bib/journals/logcom/FisherTDG14}, Doi = {10.1093/logcom/ext075}, Timestamp = {Tue, 07 Apr 2015 21:05:14 +0200}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/logcom/ext075} } @InProceedings{BoellaTorreVillataInstitutional, Title = {Institutional Social Networks for Ambient Intelligence}, Author = {Boella G. and van der Torre, L. and Villata S.}, Booktitle = {AISB 2008}, Year = {2008}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/aisb08.pdf} } @InProceedings{BVTV10, Title = {Support in Abstract Argumentation}, Author = {D. M. Gabbay and G. Boella and L. van der Torre and S. Villata}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of COMMA 2010}, Year = {2010}, Pages = {111-122}, Abstract = {In this paper, we consider two drawbacks of Cayrol and Lagasque-Schiex's meta-argumentation theory to model bipolar argumentation frameworks. We consider first the ``lost of admissibility'' in Dung's sense and second, the definition of notions of attack in the context of a support relation. We show how to prevent these drawbacks by introducing support meta-arguments. Like the model of Cayrol and Lagasque-Schiex, our formalization confirms the use of meta-argumentation to reuse Dung's properties. We do not take a stance towards the usefulness of a support relation among arguments, though we show that if one would like to introduce them, it can be done without extending Dung's theory. Finally, we show how to use meta-argumentation to instantiate an argumentation framework to represent defeasible support. In this model of support, the support relation itself can be attacked. }, Date-modified = {2011-09-25 18:08:27 +0200}, Url = {http://www.booksonline.iospress.nl/Content/View.aspx?piid=18252} } @Article{DBLP:journals/sLogica/GabbayT09, Title = {Preface for Studia Logica Special Issue (2)}, Author = {Dov M. Gabbay and Leendert van der Torre}, Journal = {Studia Logica}, Year = {2009}, Number = {2-3}, Pages = {105-108}, Volume = {93}, Abstract = {This special double issue represents new ideas in argumentation theory emanating from joint work at the University of Luxembourg and Bar-Ilan University, Israel. We take the opportunity of this preface to indicate some of the methodological principles we are studying and the subjects of the future papers}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11225-009-9212-3}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11225-009-9212-3} } @InProceedings{ICSR11, Title = {Judgment Aggregation for Cooperative Anchoring on the NAO Robots}, Author = {Ganesan, V. and Slavkovik, M. and Sousa, S. and van der Torre, L.}, Booktitle = {Works-in-progress track - 3rd International Conference on Social Robotics}, Year = {2011}, Address = {Amsterdam, The Netherlands}, Abstract = {Cooperative anchoring is the sharing of associations between symbols and sensor data across multi robot systems. We apply the solu- tion of Judgment Aggregation, a logic based collective-decision making framework from social choice theory to the problem of cooperative an- choring in terms of information fusion. We model a multi-agent system comprising of nao robots on a search exercise using its vision and audi- tion sensor into this framework and fuse them by means of aggregation rules and compare them on a truth-tracking basis.}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/icsrtest.pdf} } @InProceedings{Garion-Torre:anirem05, Title = {Design By Contract Deontic Design Language for Multiagent Systems}, Author = {C. Garion and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Coordination, Organizations, Institutions, and Norms in Multi-Agent Systems AAMAS 2005 International Workshops on Agents, Norms, and Institutions for Regulated Multiagent Systems, ANIREM 2005 and on Organizations in Multi-Agent Systems, OOOP 2005}, Year = {2006}, Address = {Berlin}, Pages = {170-182}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {LNAI}, Volume = {3913}, Abstract = {Design by contract is a well known theory that views software construction as based on contracts between clients (callers) and suppliers (routines), relying on mutual obligations and benefits made explicit by assertions. However, there is a gap between this theory and software engineering concepts and tools. For example, dealing with contract violations is realized by exception handlers, whereas it has been observed in the area of deontic logic in computer science that violations and exceptions are distinct concepts that should not be confused. To bridge this gap, we propose a software design language based on temporal deontic logic. Moreover, we show how preferences over the possible outcomes of a supplier can be added. We also discuss the relation between the normative stance toward systems implicit in the design by contract approach and the intentional or BDI stance popular in agent theory.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/anirem05a.pdf} } @InProceedings{GarionTorre2003, Title = {Design by contract - Deontic design language for component-based systems}, Author = {Christophe Garion and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the 15th Belgium-Netherlands Conference on Artificial Intelligence (BNAIC2003)}, Year = {2003}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/bnaic03b.pdf} } @InProceedings{genovese:normas, Title = {Adding Organizations and Roles as Primitives to {JADE} Framework}, Author = {Valerio Genovese and Roberto Grenna and Leendert van der Torre and Matteo Baldoni}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Normative Multiagent Systems, NorMAS'08}, Year = {2008}, Editor = {Guido Boella and Munindar Singh and Gabriella Pigozzi and Harko Verhagen}, Pages = {95-111}, Abstract = {The organization metaphor is often used in the design and imple- mentation of multiagent systems. However, few agent programming languages provide facilities to define them. Several frameworks are proposed to coordinate MAS with organizations, but they are not programmable with general purpose languages. In this paper we extend the JADE framework with primitives to program in Java organizations structured in roles and to enable agents to play roles in organizations. Roles facilitate the coordination of agents inside an organization and give new abilities in the context of organizations, called powers, to the agents which satisfy the requirements necessary to play the roles. As primitives to program organizations and roles we provide classes and protocols which enable an agent to enact a new role in an organization and to interact with the role by invoking the execution of powers, and to receive new goals to be fulfilled. Roles have state and behaviour, thus, they are instances of classes and are strictly connected with the organization offering them. Since roles and organizations can be on a different platform with respect to the role player, the communication with them happens via protocols. Moreover, since, besides using protocols, roles and organizations can have complex behaviours, they are implemented by extending the JADE agent class.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Date-modified = {2011-09-25 17:22:34 +0200}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/normas08.pdf} } @InProceedings{GDRST07, Title = {Contextual Deliberation of Cognitive Agents in Defeasible Logic (poster)}, Author = {G. Governatori and M. Dastani and A. Rotolo and I. Song and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of AAMAS07}, Year = {2007}, Abstract = {-}, Affiliation = {icr}, Date-modified = {2011-09-25 17:41:30 +0200}, Url = {http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=1329125.1329306} } @InProceedings{grossi08normative, Title = {A Normative View on The Blocks World}, Author = {Davide Grossi and Dov Gabbay and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Normative Multiagent Systems (NorMAS'08)}, Year = {2008}, Editor = {Guido Boella and Munindar Singh and Gabriella Pigozzi and Harko Verhagen}, Pages = {128-142}, Abstract = {The result of this paper is twofold. First, we sketch a formal framework to distinguish various well known ways to implement norms in a multiagent system. Second, we introduce the notion of retarded preconditions to reason about norm violations. We illustrate the framework and the notion of retarded preconditions in the block worlds environment, because the well known planning environment explains the use of normative reasoning and the challenges of norm implementation for a large AI audience.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Date-modified = {2011-09-25 17:21:13 +0200}, Url = {http://publications.uni.lu/record/2053} } @InProceedings{Torre05Anirem, Title = {Applying Normative Multiagent Systems: A Case Study}, Author = {Guido Boella, Joris Hulstijn, Yao-Hua Tan, and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of AAMAS Workshop on Agents, Norms and Institutions for Regulated Multiagent Systems}, Year = {2005}, Abstract = {We present a conceptual model of control mechanisms for virtual organizations. Control mechanisms and norms in general have certain objectives. We propose to model both the participants, and the normative system itself as autonomous agents, having certain beliefs, desires and goals. Norms, which can be internalized by the agents as obligations, are translated into conditional beliefs, desires and goals of the normative system, which concern both detection and sanctioning measures. The model is illustrated by a case study of the Renewable Obligation Certificates (ROC), introduced in the United Kingdom to stimulate the production of renewable energy. We show that the model can handle both the regulative and the evidential aspects of the case.}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/anirem05b.pdf} } @InProceedings{BT07c, Title = {An Attacker Model for Normative Multi-agent Systems}, Author = {Guido Boella, Leendert W.N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Multi-Agent Systems and Applications V, 5th International Central and Eastern European Conference on Multi-Agent Systems, CEEMAS 2007, Leipzig, Germany, September 25-27, 2007, Proceedings}, Year = {2007}, Editor = {Hans-Dieter Burkhard and Gabriela Lindemann and Rineke Verbrugge, L{\'{a}}szl{\'{o}} Zsolt Varga}, Pages = {42-51}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {4696}, Abstract = {Procedural norms are instrumental norms addressed to agents playing a role in the normative system, for example to motivate these role playing agents to recognize violations or to apply sanctions. Procedural norms have first been discussed in law, where they address legal practitioners such as legislators, lawyers and policemen, but they are discussed now too in normative multiagent systems to motivate software agents. Procedural norms aim to achieve the social order specified using regulative norms like obligations and permissions, and constitutive norms like counts-as obligations. In this paper we formalize procedural, regulative and constitutive norms using input/output logic enriched with an agent ontology and an abstraction hierarchy. We show how our formalization explains Castelfranchi's notion of mutual empowerment, stating that not only the agents playing a role in a normative system are empowered by the normative system, but the normative system itself is also empowered by the agents playing a role in it. In our terminology, the agents are not only institutionally empowered, but they are also delegated normative goals from the system. Together, institutional empowerment and normative goal delegation constitute a mechanism which we call delegation of power, where agents acting on behalf of the normative system become in charge of recognizing which institutional facts follow from brute facts.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/jal08.pdf}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/jal08.pdf} } @InProceedings{HPT07, Title = {Ten Philosophical Problems in Deontic Logic}, Author = {J{\"o}rg Hansen and Gabriella Pigozzi and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Normative Multi-agent Systems}, Year = {2007}, Address = {Dagstuhl, Germany}, Editor = {Guido Boella and Leon van der Torre and Harko Verhagen}, Number = {07122}, Publisher = {Internationales Begegnungs- und Forschungszentrum f{\"u}r Informatik (IBFI), Schloss Dagstuhl, Germany}, Series = {Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings}, Abstract = {The paper discusses ten philosophical problems in deontic logic: how to formally represent norms, when a set of norms may be termed `coherent', how to deal with normative conflicts, how contrary-to-duty obligations can be appropriately modeled, how dyadic deontic operators may be redefined to relate to sets of norms instead of preference relations between possible worlds, how various concepts of permission can be accommodated, how meaning postulates and counts-as conditionals can be taken into account, and how sets of norms may be revised and merged. The problems are discussed from the viewpoint of input/output logic as developed by van der Torre Makinson. We argue that norms, not ideality, should take the central position in deontic semantics, and that a semantics that represents norms, as input/output logic does, provides helpful tools for analyzing, clarifying and solving the problems of deontic logic.}, Annote = {Keywords: Deontic logic, normative systems, input/output logic}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/normas07b.pdf}, ISSN = {1862-4405}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/normas07b.pdf} } @InProceedings{Torre05AnalyzingControl, Title = {Analyzing Control Trust in Normative Multiagent Systems}, Author = {Hulstijn, J. and Tan Y.H. and van der Torre, L.}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the 2005 Bled eCommerce Conference}, Year = {2005}, Abstract = {It has been argued that transaction trust is composed of party trust and control trust. In this paper we study control trust: trust in an institution that has set up a control mechanism. We present an account of control mechanisms using normative multiagent systems. Control mechanisms consist of constitutive norms which define evidential documents, and regulative norms which define violation conditions and sanctions. The account is illustrated by an analysis of the Letter of Credit trade procedure.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/bled05.pdf}, Date-modified = {2011-12-20 17:14:09 +0100}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/bled05.pdf} } @Article{DBLP:journals/ijcis/JonkersLBHBT04, Title = {Concepts For Modeling Enterprise Architectures}, Author = {Henk Jonkers and Marc M. Lankhorst and Ren{\'e} van Buuren and Stijn Hoppenbrouwers and Marcello M. Bonsangue and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Journal = {Int. J. Cooperative Inf. Syst.}, Year = {2004}, Number = {3}, Pages = {257-287}, Volume = {13}, Abstract = {A coherent description of an enterprise architecture provides insight, enables communication among stakeholders and guides complicated change processes. Unfortunately, so far no enterprise architecture description language exists that fully enables integrated enterprise modelling, because for each architectural domain, architects use their own modelling techniques and concepts, tool support, visualisation techniques, etc. In this paper we outline such an integrated language and we identify and study concepts that relate architectural domains. In our language concepts for describing the relationships between architecture descriptions at the business, application, and technology levels play a central role, related to the ubiquitous problem of business-IT alignment, whereas for each architectural domain we conform to existing languages or standards such as UML. In particular, usage of services offered by one layer to another plays an important role in relating the behaviour aspects of the layers. The structural aspects of the layers are linked through the interface concept, and the information aspects through realisation relations.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ijcis04.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/S0218843004000985}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ijcis04.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/deon/KaciT06, Title = {Permissions and Uncontrollable Propositions in {DSDL}3: Non-monotonicity and Algorithms.}, Author = {S. Kaci and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Deontic Logic and Artificial Normative Systems, 8th International Workshop on Deontic Logic in Computer Science, DEON 2006, Utrecht, The Netherlands, July 12-14, 2006, Proceedings}, Year = {2006}, Editor = {L. Goble and J.-J. Meyer}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {4048}, Abstract = {In this paper we are interested in non-monotonic extensions of Bengt Hansson's standard dyadic deontic logic 3, known as DSDL3. We study specificity principles for DSDL3 with both controllable and uncontrollable propositions. We introduce an algorithm for minimal specificity which not only covers obligations but also permissions, and we discuss the distinction between weak and strong permissions. Moreover, we introduce ways to combine algorithms for minimal and maximal specificity for DSDL3 with controllable and uncontrollable propositions, based on 'optimistic' and 'pessimistic' reasoning respectively.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/deon06a.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, ISBN = {3-540-35842-0}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/deon06a.pdf} } @Article{DBLP:journals/ijar/KaciT08, Title = {Preference-based argumentation: Arguments supporting multiple values}, Author = {Souhila Kaci and Leendert van der Torre}, Journal = {Int. J. Approx. Reasoning}, Year = {2008}, Number = {3}, Pages = {730-751}, Volume = {48}, Abstract = {In preference-based argumentation theory, an argument may be preferred to another one when, for example, it is more specific, its beliefs have a higher probability or certainty, or it promotes a higher value. In this paper we generalize Bench-Capon's value-based argumentation theory such that arguments can promote multiple values, and preferences among values or arguments can be specified in various ways. We assume in addition that there is default knowledge about the preferences over the arguments, and we use an algorithm to derive the most likely preference order. In particular, we show how to use non-monotonic preference reasoning to compute preferences among arguments, and subsequently the acceptable arguments, from preferences among values. We show also how the preference ordering can be used to optimize the algorithm to construct the grounded extension by proceeding from most to least preferred arguments. }, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ijar07.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijar.2007.07.005}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ijar07.pdf} } @Article{kaci:aor08, Title = {Reasoning With Various Kinds of Preferences: Logic, Non-Monotonicity, and Algorithms}, Author = {Souhila Kaci and Leendert van der Torre}, Journal = {Annals of Operations Research}, Year = {2008}, Number = {1}, Pages = {89-114}, Volume = {163}, Abstract = {As systems dealing with preferences become more sophisticated, it becomes essential to deal with various kinds of preference statements and their interaction. We introduce a non-monotonic logic distinguishing sixteen kinds of preferences, ranging from strict to loose and from careful to opportunistic, and two kinds of ways to deal with uncertainty, either optimistically or pessimistically. The classification of the various kinds of preferences is inspired by a hypothetical agent comparing the two alternatives of a preference statement. The optimistic and pessimistic way of dealing with uncertainty correspond on the one hand to considering either the best or the worst states in the comparison of the two alternatives of a preference statement, and on the other hand to the calculation of least or most specific ``distinguished'' preference orders from a set of preference statements. We show that each way to calculate distinguished preference orders is compatible with eight kinds of preferences, in the sense that it calculates a unique distinguished preference order for a set of such preference statements, and we provide efficient algorithms that calculate these unique distinguished preference orders. In general, optimistic kinds of preferences are compatible with optimism in calculating distinguished preference orders, and pessimistic kinds of preferences are compatible with pessimism in calculating distinguished preference orders. However, these two sets of eight kinds of preferences are not exclusive, such that some kinds of preferences can be used in both ways to calculate distinguished preference orders, and other kinds of preferences cannot be used in either of them. We also consider the merging of optimistically and pessimistically constructed distinguished preferences orders. }, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10479-008-0331-4}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10479-008-0331-4} } @InProceedings{Kaci-Torre:fusion06, Title = {Merging Optimistic and Pessimistic Preferences}, Author = {S. Kaci and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of FUSION 2006}, Year = {2006}, Note = {Also in proceedings of NMR06}, Abstract = {In this paper we consider the extension of nonmonotonic preference logic with the distinction between controllable (or endogenous) and uncontrollable (or exogenous) variables, which can be used for example in agent decision making and deliberation. We assume that the agent is optimistic about its own controllables and pessimistic about its uncontrollables, and we study ways to merge these two distinct dimensions. We also consider complex preferences, such as optimistic preferences conditional on an uncontrollable, or optimistic preferences conditional on a pessimistic preference.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/nmr06b.pdf}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/nmr06b.pdf} } @InProceedings{kaci-Torre:nmr06, Title = {Preference reasoning for argumentation: non-monotonicity and algorithms}, Author = {S. Kaci and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the NMR'06}, Year = {2006}, Abstract = {In this paper we are interested in the role of preferences in argumentation theory. To promote a higher impact of preference reasoning in argumentation, we introduce a novel preference-based argumentation theory. Using non-monotonic preference reasoning we derive a Dung-style attack relation from a preference specification together with a defeat relation. In particular, our theory uses efficient algorithms computing acceptable arguments via a unique preference relation among arguments from a preference relation among sets of arguments.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/nmr06a.pdf}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/nmr06a.pdf} } @InProceedings{Torre05NonmonotonicReasinign, Title = {Non-monotonic reasoning with various kinds of preferences}, Author = {Kaci, S. and van der Torre, L.}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of PREF05}, Year = {2005}, Abstract = {We are interested in systems which do not prescribe one single kind of preference, but in which varying kinds of preferences can be used simultaneously. In such systems it is essential to know the interaction among the kinds of preferences being used, and we therefore introduce and study a nonmonotonic logic to reason about sixteen strict and non-strict kinds of preferences, including ceteris paribus preferences. Moreover, we study “distinguishedâ€� preference orders based on specificity principles by showing when these distinguished preference orders are unique, and by presenting algorithms to calculate the distinguished preference orders.}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/pref05.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/ecai/KaciTW06, Title = {Acyclic Argumentation: Attack = Conflict + Preference}, Author = {S. Kaci and L. van der Torre and E. Weydert}, Booktitle = {ECAI 2006, 17th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, August 29 - September 1, 2006, Riva del Garda, Italy, Including Prestigious Applications of Intelligent Systems (PAIS 2006), Proceedings}, Year = {2006}, Editor = {G. Brewka and S. Coradeschi and A. Perini and P. Traverso}, Pages = {725-726}, Publisher = {IOS Press}, Abstract = {In this paper we study the fragment of Dung's argumentation theory in which the strict attack relation is acyclic. We show that every attack relation satisfying a particular property can be represented by a symmetric conflict relation and a transitive preference relation in the following way.We define an instance of Dung's abstract argumentation theory, in which `argument A attacks argument B' is defined as `argument A conflicts with argument B' and `argument A is at least as preferred as argument B', where the conflict relation is symmetric and the preference relation is transitive.We show that this new preference-based argumentation theory characterizes the acyclic strict attack relation, in the sense that every attack relation defined as such a combination satisfies the property, and for every attack relation satisfying the property we can find a symmetric conflict relation and a transitive preference relation satisfying the equation. }, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ecai06d.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, ISBN = {1-58603-642-4}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ecai06d.pdf} } @InProceedings{KTW07, Title = {On the Acceptability of Incompatible Arguments}, Author = {Souhila Kaci and Leendert W.N. van der Torre and Emil Weydert}, Booktitle = {Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty, 9th European Conference, ECSQARU 2007, Hammamet, Tunisia, October 31 -- November 2, 2007, Proceedings}, Year = {2007}, Editor = {Khaled Mellouli}, Pages = {247-258}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {4724}, Abstract = {In this paper we study the acceptability of incompatible arguments within Dung's abstract argumentation framework. As an example we introduce an instance of Dung's framework where arguments are represented by propositional formulas and an argument attacks another one when the conjunction of their representations is inconsistent, which we characterize as a kind of symmetric attack. Since symmetric attack is known to have the drawback to collapse the various argumentation semantics, we consider also two variations. First, we consider propositional arguments distinguishing support and conclusion. Second, we introduce a preference ordering over the arguments and we define the attack relation in terms of a symmetric incompatibility relation and the preference relation. We show how to characterize preference-based argumentation using a kind of acyclic attack relation. }, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ecsqaru07.pdf}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ecsqaru07.pdf} } @InProceedings{MFI11, Title = {Judgment aggregation rules based on minimization.}, Author = {Lang, J. and Pigozzi, G. and Slavkovik, M. and van der Torre, L.}, Booktitle = {Actes des Cinqui{\`{e}}mes Journ{\'{e}}es Francophones Mod{\`{e}}les Formel de l'Interaction (MFI 11)}, Year = {2011}, Editor = {Dessalles, J.L. and Konieczny, S.}, Month = {6}, Note = {3-5 June 2009, Lannion, France}, Pages = {238-246}, Abstract = {Many voting rules are based on some minimization principle. Likewise, in the field of logic-based knowledge representation and reasoning, many belief change or inconsistency handling operators also make use of minimization. Surprisingly, minimization has not played a major role in the field of judgment aggregation, in spite of its proximity to voting theory and logic-based knowledge representation and reasoning. Here we make a step in this direction and study six judgment aggregation rules; two of them, based on distances, have been previously defined; the other four are new, and all inspired both by voting theory and knowledge representation and reasoning. We study the inclusion relationships between these rules and address some of their social choice theoretic properties.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Citation = {http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=2000378.2000407} } @InProceedings{TARK11, Title = {Judgment aggregation rules based on minimization}, Author = {Lang, J. and Pigozzi, G. and Slavkovik, M. and van der Torre, L.}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the 13th Conference on Theoretical Aspects of Rationality and Knowledge}, Year = {2011}, Address = {New York, NY, USA}, Pages = {238--246}, Publisher = {ACM}, Series = {TARK XIII}, Abstract = {Many voting rules are based on some minimization principle. Likewise, in the field of logic-based knowledge representation and reasoning, many belief change or inconsistency handling operators also make use of minimization. Surprisingly, minimization has not played a major role in the field of judgment aggregation, in spite of its proximity to voting theory and logic-based knowledge representation and reasoning. Here we make a step in this direction and study six judgment aggregation rules; two of them, based on distances, have been previously defined; the other four are new, and all inspired both by voting theory and knowledge representation and reasoning. We study the inclusion relationships between these rules and address some of their social choice theoretic properties.}, Acmid = {2000407}, ISBN = {978-1-4503-0707-9}, Keywords = {aggregation rules, distance-based merging, judgment aggregation, voting theory}, Location = {Groningen, Netherlands}, Numpages = {9}, Url = {http://dl.acm.org/authorize?445477} } @InProceedings{lang:ecai08, Title = {From belief change to preference change}, Author = {Jerome Lang and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of Eighteenth European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI2008)}, Year = {2008}, Abstract = {Various tasks need to consider preferences in a dynamic way. We start by discussing several possible meanings of preference change, and then focus on the one we think is the most natural: preferences evolving after some new fact has been learned. We define a family of such preference change operators, parameterized by a revision function on epistemic states and a semantics for interpreting preferences over formulas. We list some natural properties that this kind of preference change should fulfill and give conditions on the revision function and the semantics of preference for each of these properties to hold.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Date-modified = {2011-09-25 17:52:44 +0200}, Url = {http://www.booksonline.iospress.nl/Content/View.aspx?piid=9983} } @InProceedings{Torre01TwoTypes, Title = {Two types of conflicts between desires (and how to resolve them)}, Author = {Lang, J. and van der Torre, L. and Weydert, E.}, Booktitle = {In Proceedings of AAAI Spring Symposium on Game Theoretic and Decision Theoretic Agents (GTDT2001)}, Year = {2001}, Pages = {54-59}, Publisher = {AAAI press}, Abstract = {Autonomous agents frequently reason about preferences such as desires and goals, and many logics have been proposed to formalize reasoning about such concepts. Though sophisticated enough to handle many aspects of preferences (such as specificity, priority, or context-dependence), these approaches fail to represent conflicts in a suitable way. In this paper we start with conflicts in Boutilier's logic of qualitative decision, and our main claim is that the various types of conflicts can be clustered in two groups, respectively based on what we call utopian worlds and hidden uncertainty. We also sketch how Boutilier's logic can be relaxed to represent these two classes in a consistent way.}, Date-modified = {2011-12-20 17:12:21 +0100}, Read = {0}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/aaaiss01a.ps.Z} } @Article{DBLP:journals/corr/LangPSTV15, Title = {Majority-preserving judgment aggregation rules}, Author = {J{\'{e}}r{\^{o}}me Lang and Gabriella Pigozzi and Marija Slavkovik and Leendert W. N. van der Torre and Srdjan Vesic}, Journal = {CoRR}, Year = {2015}, Volume = {abs/1502.05888}, Bibsource = {dblp computer science bibliography, http://dblp.org}, Biburl = {http://dblp.uni-trier.de/rec/bib/journals/corr/LangPSTV15}, Timestamp = {Tue, 07 Apr 2015 21:05:14 +0200}, Url = {http://arxiv.org/abs/1502.05888} } @Article{DBLP:journals/aamas/LangTW02, Title = {Utilitarian Desires}, Author = {J{\'e}r{\^o}me Lang and Leendert W. N. van der Torre and Emil Weydert}, Journal = {Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems}, Year = {2002}, Number = {3}, Pages = {329-363}, Volume = {5}, Abstract = {Autonomous agents reason frequently about preferences such as desires and goals. In this paper we propose a logic of desires with a utilitarian semantics, in which we study non-monotonic reasoning about desires and preferences based on the idea that desires can be understood in terms of utility losses (penalties for violations) and utility gains (rewards for fulfillments). Our logic allows for a systematic study and classification of desires, for example by distinguishing subtly different ways to add up these utility losses and gains. We propose an explicit construction of the agent's preference relation from a set of desires together with different kinds of knowledge. A set of desires extended with knowledge induces a set of `distinguished' utility functions by adding up the utility losses and gains of the individual desires, and these distinguished utility functions induce the preference relation.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/aamas02.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1015508524218}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/aamas02.pdf} } @Article{DBLP:journals/logcom/LeiteTABT14, Title = {Preface to the Special Issue on Computational Logic in Multi-Agent Systems {(CLIMA} {XII)}}, Author = {Jo{\~{a}}o Leite and Paolo Torroni and Thomas {\AA}gotnes and Guido Boella and Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Journal = {J. Log. Comput.}, Year = {2014}, Number = {6}, Pages = {1141--1144}, Volume = {24}, Bibsource = {dblp computer science bibliography, http://dblp.org}, Biburl = {http://dblp.uni-trier.de/rec/bib/journals/logcom/LeiteTABT14}, Doi = {10.1093/logcom/exs067}, Timestamp = {Tue, 07 Apr 2015 21:05:14 +0200}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/logcom/exs067} } @InProceedings{makinson2003input, Title = {What is input/output logic?}, Author = {Makinson, D. and van der Torre, L.}, Booktitle = {Foundations of the Formal Sciences II: Applications of Mathematical Logic in Philosophy and Linguistics, Papers of a Conference Held in Bonn, November 10-13, 2000}, Year = {2003}, Organization = {Kluwer Academic Pub}, Pages = {163}, Abstract = {We explain the raison d'etre and basic ideas of input/output logic, sketching the central elements with pointers to other publications for detailed developments. The motivation comes from the logic of norms. Unconstrained input/output operations are straightforward to define, with relatively simple behaviour, but ignore the subtleties of contrary-to-duty situations. To deal with these more sensitively, we constrain input/output operations by means of consistency conditions, expressed in the concept of an outfamily. However, this is a more complex affair, with difficult choices between alternative options.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/fotfs03.pdf}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/fotfs03.pdf} } @Article{makinson2003permission, Title = {Permission from an input/output perspective}, Author = {Makinson, D. and van der Torre, L.}, Journal = {Journal of Philosophical Logic}, Year = {2003}, Number = {4}, Pages = {391--416}, Volume = {32}, Abstract = {Input/output logics are abstract structures designed to represent conditional obligations and goals. In this paper we use them to study conditional permission. This perspective provides a clear separation of the familiar notion of negative permission from the more elusive one of positive permission. Moreover, it reveals that there are at least two kinds of positive permission. Although indistinguishable in the unconditional case, they are quite different in conditional contexts. One of them, which we call static positive permission, guides the citizen and law enforcement authorities in the assessment of specific actions under current norms, and it behaves like a weakened obligation. Another, which we call dynamic positive permission, guides the legislator. It describes the limits on the prohibitions that may be introduced into a code, and under suitable conditions behaves like a strengthened negative permission. }, Publisher = {Springer}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/jpl03.pdf} } @Article{springerlink:10.1023/A:1024806529939, Title = {Permission from an Input/Output Perspective}, Author = {Makinson, David and van der Torre, Leendert}, Journal = {Journal of Philosophical Logic}, Year = {2003}, Note = {10.1023/A:1024806529939}, Pages = {391-416}, Volume = {32}, Abstract = {Input/output logics are abstract structures designed to represent conditional obligations and goals. In this paper we use them to study conditional permission. This perspective provides a clear separation of the familiar notion of negative permission from the more elusive one of positive permission. Moreover, it reveals that there are at least two kinds of positive permission. Although indistinguishable in the unconditional case, they are quite different in conditional contexts. One of them, which we call static positive permission, guides the citizen and law enforcement authorities in the assessment of specific actions under current norms, and it behaves like a weakened obligation. Another, which we call dynamic positive permission, guides the legislator. It describes the limits on the prohibitions that may be introduced into a code, and under suitable conditions behaves like a strengthened negative permission.}, ISSN = {0022-3611}, Issue = {4}, Keyword = {Humanities, Social Sciences and Law}, Publisher = {Springer Netherlands}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1024806529939} } @InProceedings{Torre2000ConsistencyConstraint, Title = {Consistency constraints for input/output logic: a comparative review}, Author = {Makinson, D. and van der Torre, L.}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the Fifth Workshop on Deontic Logic in Computer Science (Deon'2000), Toulouse}, Year = {2000}, Pages = {261-280}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/deon00b.pdf}, Date-modified = {2011-12-20 17:14:26 +0100}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/deon00b.pdf} } @InProceedings{Torre2000InputOutput, Title = {Input-output logics}, Author = {Makinson, D. and van der Torre, L.}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the Fifth Workshop on Deontic Logic in Computer Science (Deon'2000), Toulouse}, Year = {2000}, Pages = {239-259}, Abstract = {In a range of contexts, one comes across processes resembling inference, but where input propositions are not in general included among outputs, and the operation is not in any way reversible. Examples arise in contexts of conditional obligations, goals, ideals, preferences, actions, and beliefs. Our purpose is to develop a theory of such input/output operations. Four are singled out: simpleminded, basic (making intelligent use of disjunctive inputs), simple-minded reusable (in which outputs may be recycled as inputs), and basic reusable. They are defined semantically and characterised by derivation rules, as well as in terms of relabeling procedures and modal operators. Their behaviour is studied on both semantic and syntactic levels.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/deon001.pdf}, Date-modified = {2011-12-20 17:13:16 +0100}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/deon00a.pdf} } @Article{makinson2001constraints, Title = {Constraints for input/output logics}, Author = {Makinson, D. and Van der Torre, L.}, Journal = {Journal of Philosophical Logic}, Year = {2001}, Number = {2}, Pages = {155--185}, Volume = {30}, Abstract = {In a previous paper we developed a general theory of input/output logics. These are operations resembling inference, but where inputs need not be included among outputs, and outputs need not be reusable as inputs. In the present paper we study what happens when they are constrained to render output consistent with input. This is of interest for deontic logic, where it provides a manner of handling contrary-to-duty obligations. Our procedure is to constrain the set of generators of the input/output system, considering only the maximal subsets that do not yield output conflicting with a given input. When inputs are authorised to reappear as outputs, both maxichoice revision in the sense of Alchourron/Makinson and the default logic of Poole emerge as special cases, and there is a close relation with Reiter default logic. However, our focus is on the general case where inputs need not be outputs. We show in what contexts the consistency of input with output may be reduced to its consistency with a truth-functional combination of components of generators, and under what conditions constrained output may be obtained by a derivation that is constrained at every step.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/jpl01.pdf}, Publisher = {Springer}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/jpl01.pdf} } @Article{makinson2000input, Title = {Input/output logics}, Author = {Makinson, D. and Van Der Torre, L.}, Journal = {Journal of Philosophical Logic}, Year = {2000}, Number = {4}, Pages = {383--408}, Volume = {29}, Publisher = {Springer}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/jpl00.pdf} } @InProceedings{Torre05DiaGamesNego, Title = {Dialague games and negotiation}, Author = {Mehdi Dastani, Joris Hulstijn, Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the Agents 2001}, Abstract = {Multi-agent activities often require negotiation. We propose a way to construct flexible negotiation protocols, based on dialogue games, originally developed for the description of human dialogue. The rules of a dialogue game function as a recipe for joint action. A particular type of a dialogue game, an initiative-response pair, defines minimal well-formed interactions. From such basic exchanges larger dialogues can be constructed coherently. The notion of `uptake' is crucial in this respect. By making an initiative, an agent invites other participants to respond in a particular way. An initiative is often ambiguous. There are different ways the responder can take up the challenge. Thus the interaction is jointly determined by the participants.}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/agents01b.ps} } @Article{DBLP:journals/japll/MeydenT11, Title = {Selected and revised papers from the Ninth International Conference on Deontic Logic in Computer Science (DEON 2008)}, Author = {Ron van der Meyden and Leon van der Torre}, Journal = {J. Applied Logic}, Year = {2011}, Number = {2}, Pages = {81-82}, Volume = {9}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jal.2011.02.001}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jal.2011.02.001} } @Other{10993/14533, Title = {Input/output logic}, Author = {Parent, X. and van der Torre, L.}, Publisher = {College Publications}, Timestamp = {2015.01.26}, Year = {2013} } @InProceedings{ParTor09, Title = {Input/output logics}, Author = {Xavier Parent and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {9th De Morgan Workshop on Deontic Logic}, Year = {2009}, Month = dec, Abstract = {-}, Affiliation = {icr}, Date-modified = {2011-09-25 17:55:47 +0200}, Url = {http://publications.uni.lu/record/4082?ln=fr} } @Misc{ParTB09, Title = {Normative multi-agent systems}, Author = {Xavier Parent and Leendert van der Torre and Guido Boella}, Note = {Tutorial at the European Agent Systems Summer School (EASSS'09), Torino}, Year = {2009}, Abstract = {Normative multiagent systems (NorMAS) combine theories and frameworks for normative systems with multiagent systems. These systems provide a promising model for human and artificial agent co-ordination, because they integrate norms and individual intelligence. The course will be split into three. The first half will introduce students to the area, and its main challenges. The second half will be devoted to deontic logic, the logic of obligations and permissions, which aims at providing a formal foundation to normative multi-agent systems. We will start with an introduction to the semantics and axiomatic foundations of deontic logic, with a special emphasis on so-called dyadic deontic logic. Issues related to its meta-theory will be briefly discussed. Some problems have been closed, others are still open. We will then look at (what is certainly) the main problem encountered when applying deontic logic to agent reasoning and communication: the problem of contrary-to-duty reasoning. The third half will be devoted to [roles and organizations?].}, Affiliation = {icr}, Date-modified = {2011-09-25 17:59:06 +0200}, Url = {http://agents009.di.unito.it/abstractsCourses/GuidoBoella.pdf} } @Other{10993/14524, Title = {Intuitionistic basis for IOL}, Author = {Parent, X. and van der Torre, L. and Gabbay, D. M.}, Publisher = {Springer}, Timestamp = {2015.01.26}, Year = {2014} } @InProceedings{Torre08PartImpSemForGoalChange, Title = {Conviviality Masks in Role-Based Institutions Multi-Agent Teleconferencing in Virtual Worlds}, Author = {Patrice caire, Serena Villata , Leendert van der Torre, Guido Boella}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of AAMAS 2008)}, Year = {2008} } @Other{10993/12975, Title = {Learning and Reasoning about Norms using Neural-Symbolic Systems}, Abstract = {In this paper we provide a neural-symbolic framework to model, reason about and learn norms in multi-agent systems. To this purpose, we define a fragment of Input/Output (I/O) logic that can be embedded into a neural network. We extend d\text{'}Avila Garcez et al. Connectionist Inductive Learning and Logic Programming System (CILP) to translate an I/O logic theory into a Neural Network (NN) that can be trained further with examples: we call this new system Normative- CILP (N-CILP). We then present a new algorithm to handle priorities between rules in order to cope with normative issues like Contrary to Duty (CTD), Priorities, Exceptions and Permissions. We illustrate the applicability of the framework on a case study based on RoboCup rules: within this working example, we compare the learning capacity of a network built with N-CILP with a non symbolic neural net- work, we explore how the initial knowledge impacts on the overall performance, and we test the NN capacity of learn- ing norms, generalizing new Contrary to Duty rules from examples.}, Author = {Perotti, A. and Boella, G. and Colombo Tosatto, S. and d\text{'}Avila Garcez, A. S. and Genovese, V. and van der Torre, L.}, Timestamp = {2015.01.26}, Year = {2012} } @InProceedings{PST08b, Title = {Conclusion-based procedure for judgment aggregation satisfying premise independence}, Author = {Gabriella Pigozzi and Marija Slavkovik and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Logic and the Foundations of Game and Decision Theory, LOFT 2008}, Year = {2008}, Address = {Amsterdam, The Netherlands}, Editor = {G. Bonanno and B. Lowe and W. van der Hoek}, Pages = {35}, Abstract = {-}, Affiliation = {icr}, Date = {3-5 July 2008}, Date-modified = {2011-09-25 17:38:53 +0200}, Url = {http://publications.uni.lu/record/2079} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/aldt/PigozziST09, Title = {A Complete Conclusion-Based Procedure for Judgment Aggregation}, Author = {Gabriella Pigozzi and Marija Slavkovik and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Algorithmic Decision Theory, First International Conference, ADT 2009, Venice, Italy, October 20-23, 2009. Proceedings}, Year = {2009}, Editor = {Francesca Rossi and Alexis Tsouki{\`a}s}, Pages = {1-13}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {5783}, Abstract = {Judgment aggregation is a formal theory reasoning about how a group of agents can aggregate individual judgments on connected propositions into a collective judgment on the same propositions. Three procedures for successfully aggregating judgments sets are: premise-based procedure, conclusion-based procedure and distance-based merging. The conclusion-based procedure has been little investigated because it pro- vides a way to aggregate the conclusions, but not the premises, thus it outputs an incomplete judgment set. The goal of this paper is to present a conclusion-based procedure outputting complete judgment sets.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Date-modified = {2011-12-21 13:24:42 +0100}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-04428-1_1}, ISBN = {978-3-642-04427-4}, Url = {http://www.springerlink.com/content/ng726986734h5103/} } @InProceedings{BST08, Title = {Desirable Tie-breaking Rules in Collective Decision Making}, Author = {Gabriella Pigozzi and Marija Slavkovik and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Annales du Lamsade, Proceedings of the DIMACS-LAMSADE Workshop on Algorithmic Decision Theory}, Year = {2008}, Editor = {V. Paschos, B. Roy}, Pages = {171-174}, Abstract = {-}, Affiliation = {icr}, Date-modified = {2011-09-25 17:45:47 +0200}, ISSN = {1762-455X}, Url = {http://publications.uni.lu/record/2081?ln=fr} } @InProceedings{PST09a, Title = {A complete conclusion-based procedure for judgment aggregation}, Author = {Gabriella Pigozzi and Marija Slavkovik and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the First International Conference on Algorithmic Decision Theory (ADT)}, Year = {2009}, Month = oct, Pages = {1-13}, Publisher = {Springer Verlag}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence}, Volume = {5783}, Abstract = {Judgment aggregation is a formal theory reasoning about how a group of agents can aggregate individual judgments on connected propositions into a collective judgment on the same propositions. Three procedures for successfully aggregating judgments sets are: premise-based procedure, conclusion-based procedure and distance-based merging. The conclusion-based procedure has been little investigated because it pro- vides a way to aggregate the conclusions, but not the premises, thus it outputs an incomplete judgment set. The goal of this paper is to present a conclusion-based procedure outputting complete judgment sets.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Date-modified = {2011-12-21 13:23:51 +0100}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/pubs/adt09-techReport.pdf} } @InProceedings{PST09b, Title = {Formal ex-post rationalization - A complete conclusion-based procedure for judgment aggregation}, Author = {Gabriella Pigozzi and Marija Slavkovik and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the Cinqui{\`{e}}mes Journ{\'{e}}es Francophones Mod{\`{e}}les Formel de l'Interaction (MFI 09)}, Year = {2009}, Month = jun, Note = {3-5 June 2009, Lannion, France}, Abstract = {Judgment aggregation is a formal theory reasoning about how a group of agents can aggregate their individual judgments on connected propositions into a collective set of judgments on these propositions. There are three procedures for aggregating judgments sets : premise-based procedure, conclusion-based procedure and distance-based merging. The conclusion-based procedure has been little investigated because it provides a way to aggregate the conclusions, but not the premises, thus it outputs an incomplete judgment set. The goal of this paper is to present a conclusion-based procedure outputting complete judgment sets. Our procedure is composed of two steps. First, majority voting is used to aggregate the conclusion as it has been previously done by the incomplete conclusion-based procedure. Once a collective conclusion is reached, distance-based merging is used to aggregate the premises using the chosen conclusion as an integrity constraint to select only those premise sets which support it. An additional integrity constraint can be added in the merging phase to ensure that unanimity is heeded when selecting the premises. Additionally we discuss the issue of manipulability of the proposed procedure by drawing parallels with existing work on manipulability of belief merging operators.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Date-modified = {2011-09-25 17:50:06 +0200}, Url = {http://www.info.fundp.ac.be/mfi09/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/PigozziSlavkovikVandertorre.pdf} } @TechReport{PST09c, Title = {A complete conclusion-based procedure for judgment aggregation}, Author = {Gabriella Pigozzi and Marija Slavkovik and Leendert van der Torre}, Institution = {University of Luxembourg}, Year = {2009}, Month = jul, Abstract = {Judgment aggregation is a formal theory reasoning about how a group of agents can aggregate individual judgments on connected propositions into a collective judgment on the same propositions. Three procedures for successfully aggregating judgments sets are: premise-based procedure, conclusion-based procedure and distance-based merging. The conclusion-based procedure has been little investigated because it pro- vides a way to aggregate the conclusions, but not the premises, thus it outputs an incomplete judgment set. The goal of this paper is to present a conclusion-based procedure outputting complete judgment sets.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/pubs/adt09-techReport.pdf}, Date-modified = {2011-09-21 16:29:15 +0200}, ISBN = {978-2-87971-028-0}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/pubs/adt09-techReport.pdf} } @InProceedings{PST08c, Title = {Independence in judgment aggregation}, Author = {Gabriella Pigozzi and Marija Slavkovik and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the Ninth International Meeting of the Society for Social Choice and Welfare, SCW'08}, Year = {2008}, Address = {Montreal, Canada}, Affiliation = {icr}, Date = {19-22 June 2008}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/scw08.pdf} } @InProceedings{PT08, Title = {From belief change to norm change}, Author = {Gabriella Pigozzi and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Prague International Colloquium: Logic of change, change of logic, LOCCOL'08}, Year = {2008}, Address = {Villa Lanna, Prague, Czech Republic}, Pages = {51--52}, Abstract = {-}, Affiliation = {icr}, Date = {10--14 September 2008}, Date-modified = {2011-09-25 17:52:05 +0200}, Url = {http://publications.uni.lu/record/2083?ln=fr} } @InProceedings{PT07, Title = {Premise Independence in Judgment Aggregation}, Author = {G. Pigozzi and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Formal Models of Belief Change in Rational Agents}, Year = {2007}, Address = {Schloss Dagstuhl, Germany}, Publisher = {Internationales Begegnungs- und Forschungszentrum fuer Informatik (IBFI)}, Series = {Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings}, Volume = {07531}, Abstract = {Judgment aggregation studies how agent opinions on logically interconnected propositions can be mapped into a collective judgment on the same propositions, and is plagued by impossibility results. In this paper we study the central notion of independence in these impossibility results. First, we argue that the distinction between the premises and conclusions play an important role in the benchmark examples of judgment aggregation. Second, we consider the notion of independence in judgment aggregation frameworks, and we observe that the distinction between premises and conclusion is not taken into account. Third, based on our analysis, we introduce independence assumptions that distinguish premises from conclusion. We show that, by introducing new operators that satisfy our independence assumptions, the problematic impossibility results no longer holds.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/07351.PigozziGabriella.Paper.1216.pdf} } @InProceedings{Raskin96howto, Title = {How to Model Normative Behavior in Petri Nets}, Author = {Jean-Fran{\c c}ois Raskin and B Namur and Leendert W.N. van der Torre and Yao-hua Tan}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the 2nd Modelage Workshop on Formal Models of Agents}, Year = {1996}, Pages = {223--241}, Abstract = {In this paper, we show how to extend the Petri net formalism to represent different types of behavior, in particular normative behavior. This extension is motivated by the use of Petri nets to model bureaucratic procedures, which contain normative aspects like obligations and permissions. We propose to extend Petri nets with a preference relation, a well-known mechanism from deontic logic to discriminate between ideal and varying sub-ideal states.}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/modelage96.ps.Z} } @InProceedings{RienstraTAFA11, Title = {Multi-sorted Argumentation}, Author = {Tjitze Rienstra and Alan Perotti and Serena Villata and Dov Gabbay Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on the Theory and Applications of Formal Argumentation (TAFA 2011)}, Year = {2011}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/tafa11multi.pdf} } @InProceedings{rotolo:wliamas08, Title = {Time and Defeasibility in {FIPA} {ACL} Semantics}, Author = {Antonino Rotolo and Guido Boella and Guido Governatori and Joris Hulstijn and Regis Riveret and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of WLIAMAS 2008}, Year = {2008}, Publisher = {IEEE}, Abstract = {Inferences about speech acts are often conditional, non-monotonic, and involve the issue of time. Most agent communication languages, however, ignore these issues, due to the difficulty to combine them in a single formalism. This paper addresses such issues in defeasible logic, and shows how to express a semantics for ACLs in order to make non-monotonic inferences on the basis of speech acts.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Date-modified = {2011-09-25 18:16:15 +0200}, Url = {http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.152.7796&rep=rep1&type=pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/kesamsta/SauroTV09, Title = {Dependency in Cooperative Boolean Games}, Author = {Luigi Sauro and Leendert van der Torre and Serena Villata}, Booktitle = {Agent and Multi-Agent Systems: Technologies and Applications, Third KES International Symposium, KES-AMSTA 2009, Uppsala, Sweden, June 3-5, 2009. Proceedings}, Year = {2009}, Editor = {Anne H{\aa}kansson and Ngoc Thanh Nguyen and Ronald L. Hartung and Robert J. Howlett and Lakhmi C. Jain}, Pages = {1-10}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {5559}, Abstract = {Cooperative boolean games are coalitional games with both goals and costs associated to actions, and dependence networks for boolean games are a kind of social networks representing how the actions of other agents have an influence on the achievement of an agent's goal. In this paper, we introduce two new types of dependence networks, called the abstract dependence network and the refined dependence network. Moreover, we show that the notion of stability is complete with respect to the solution concept of the core in the case of cooperative boolean games with costly actions. We present a reduction, called Delta-reduction, to pass from a cooperative boolean game G to game G′ without loosing solutions.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Date-modified = {2011-09-25 17:44:23 +0200}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-01665-3_1}, ISBN = {978-3-642-01664-6}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-01665-3_1} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/isola/StamJBBT04, Title = {Using {XML} Transformations for Enterprise Architectures}, Author = {A. Stam and J. Jacob and F. S. de Boer and M. Bonsangue and L. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Leveraging Applications of Formal Methods, First International Symposium, ISoLA 2004, Paphos, Cyprus, October 30 - November 2, 2004, Revised Selected Papers}, Year = {2006}, Editor = {T. Margaria and B. Steffen}, Pages = {42-56}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {4313}, Abstract = {In this paper we report on the use of XML transformations in the context of Enterprise Architectures. We show that XML transformation techniques can be applied to visualize and analyze enterprise architectures in a formal way. We propose transformational techniques to extract views from an XML document containing architectural information and indicate how to perform a specific form of impact analysis on this information. The transformations are formally expressed with the language RML, a compact yet powerful transformation language developed at CWI, which obtains its power from regular expressions defined on XML documents. We discuss a tool that has been built on top of it to visualize the results of the transformations and illustrate the advantages of our approach: the genericity of XML, the application of a single technique (namely XML transformations) for various tasks, and the benefits of having a model viewer which is in complete ignorance of the architectural language used.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/11925040_4}, ISBN = {3-540-48928-2}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/11925040_4} } @Other{10993/19624, Title = {Combining Regulative and Constitutive Norms in Input/Output Logic}, Author = {Sun, X. and van der Torre, L.}, Timestamp = {2015.01.26}, Year = {2014} } @Misc{Tan97scepticalreasoning, Title = {Sceptical Reasoning About Defaults}, Author = {Yao-hua Tan and Leendert W.N. van der Torre}, Year = {1997}, Abstract = {In this paper we investigate preference-based logics for sceptical reasoning about defaults. In preference-based default logics a default is either formalized by a strong or by a weak preference, instances of what we call the ordering and minimizing usages of preference orderings. In a previous paper, we showed how ordering and minimizing can be formalized in Boutilier's modal logic CT40 and how they can be combined in a two-phase default logic. In this paper, we extend these results from the credulous case to the more complex sceptical case.}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ScepReasAboutDefaults.pdf} } @InCollection{Torre2000Contextual, Title = {Contextual Deontic Logic: violation contexts and factual defeasibility}, Author = {Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Formal Aspects of Context, Applied Logic Series}, Publisher = {Kluwer}, Year = {2000}, Editor = {Bonzon, P. and Cavalcanti, M. and Nossum, R.}, Pages = {143-166}, Abstract = {In this article we introduce Contextual Deontic Logic (Cdl) to analyze the relation between deontic, contextual and defeasible reasoning. The optimal state, and therefore the set of active obligations, can change radically when the violation context changes. In such cases we say that the obligations only in force in the previous violation context are defeated; contextual deontic logic is therefore a defeasible deontic logic. This is expressed by the definition O fl (ffjfi) =def O(ffjfin:fl): `ff ought to be (done) if fi is (done) in the context where fl is (done)' is defined as `ff ought to be (done) if fi is (done) unless :fl is (done).' The unless clause formalizes explicit exceptions and is analogous to the justification in Reiter's default rules. Cdl is a monotonic defeasible deontic logic, because it has factual defeasibility but not overridden defeasibility.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/context.ps.Z}, Date-modified = {2011-12-20 17:14:05 +0100}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/context.ps.Z} } @Misc{TorreMaster, Title = {Orderings for first-order inductive logic (in Dutch)}, Author = {Leendert van der Torre}, Abstract = {Deze skriptie omvat een onderzoek naar wiskundige eigenschappen van ordeningen op formules binnen een eerste-orde logika die ten grondslag liggen aan induktief lerende systemen. Naast de analyse van ordeningen worden de induktieve modellen besproken waarin deze ordeningen worden toegepast. De motivatie van deze modellen wordt geanalyseerd aan de hand van wetenschapsfilosofische theorieen, waarvan ook de kennis- en taaltheoretische achtergronden worden behandeld.}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/masters.ps.Z} } @InProceedings{Torre2000CausalDeontic, Title = {Causal deontic logic}, Author = {van der Torre, L.}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the Fifth Workshop on Deontic Logic in Computer Science (Deon'2000), Toulouse}, Year = {2000}, Pages = {351-367}, Abstract = {In this paper we introduce a descriptive temporal deontic logic based on causal theories. The underlying nonmonotonic temporal logic has two distinctive properties. First, it distinguishes between observations and interventions, which among others is used to distinguish between the existence and creation of deontic states such as obligations, permissions and prohibitions. Second, its explicit causal theories lead to a descriptive or modeling perspective, that not only enables a simple and intuitive formalization of the benchmark examples of nonmonotonic temporal reasoning, but that also makes the logic a good candidate for applications in computer science.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/deon00.ps.Z}, Date-modified = {2011-12-20 17:14:46 +0100}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/deon00.ps.Z} } @InCollection{Torre99thelogic, Title = {The Logic Of Reusable Propositional Output With The Fulfilment Constraint}, Author = {Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Labelled Deduction, volume 17 of Applied Logic Series}, Publisher = {Kluwer}, Year = {2000}, Pages = {245--266}, Abstract = {This paper shows the equivalence of three ways of expressing a certain strong consistency constraint -- called the fulfilment constraint -- on proofs of the logic of reusable propositional output: as a global requirement on proofs, as a local requirement on labels of formulas, and by phasing of proof rules. More specifically, we first show that the fulfilment constraint may be expressed either as a requirement on the historical structure of the proof tree or as a requirement on the contents of labels attached to its nodes. Second, we show that labelled proofs may be rewritten into a tightly phased form in which rules are applied in a fixed order. Third, we show that when a proof is in such a phased form, the consistency check on labels becomes redundant.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ld99.ps.Z}, Date-modified = {2011-12-20 17:12:43 +0100}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ld99.ps.Z} } @InProceedings{Torre99LabelledLogics, Title = {Risk parameters for utilitarian desires (extended abstract)}, Author = {van der Torre, L.}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the Fourth Dutch-German Workshop on Nonmonotonic Reasoning Techniques and Their Applications (DGNMR'99)}, Year = {1999} } @InProceedings{Torre98PhasedLabelled, Title = {Phased labeled logics of conditional goals}, Author = {van der Torre, L.}, Booktitle = {Logics in Artificial Intelligence. Proceedings of the 6th European Workshop on Logics in AI (JELIA'98)}, Year = {1998}, Pages = {92-106}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {LNAI}, Volume = {1489}, Abstract = {In this paper we introduce phased labeled logics of conditional goals. Labels are used to impose restrictions on the proof theory of the logic. The restriction discussed in this paper is that a proof rule can be blocked in a derivation due to the fact that another proof rule has been applied earlier in the derivation. We call a set of proof rules that can be applied in any order a phase in the proof theory. We propose a one-phase logic of goals containing four proof rules, and we show that it is equivalent to a four-phase logic of goals in which each phase contains exactly one proof rule. The proof theory of the four-phase logic of goals is much more effcient, because other orderings no longer have to be considered.}, Url = {http://www.springerlink.com/content/vmmgdbkab7b3kvx2/} } @InProceedings{Torre98PhasedLabelled2, Title = {Phased labeled logics of conditional goals}, Author = {van der Torre, L.}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Labelled Deduction (LD'98)}, Year = {1998}, Abstract = {In this paper we introduce phased labeled logics of conditional goals. Labels are used to impose restrictions on the proof theory of the logic. The restriction discussed in this paper is that a proof rule can be blocked in a derivation due to the fact that another proof rule has been applied earlier in the derivation. We call a set of proof rules that can be applied in any order a phase in the proof theory. We propose a one-phase logic of goals containing four proof rules, and we show that it is equivalent to a four-phase logic of goals in which each phase contains exactly one proof rule. The proof theory of the four-phase logic of goals is much more effcient, because other orderings no longer have to be considered.}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ld98.ps.Z} } @InProceedings{Torre04SpecifyingMultiagent, Title = {Specifying Multiagent Organizations}, Author = {van der Torre, L. and Hulstijn, J. and Dastani, M. and Broersen, J.}, Booktitle = {In Proceedings of the Seventh Workshop on Deontic Logic in Computer Science (Deon'2004)}, Year = {2004}, Pages = {243-257}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {LNCS}, Volume = {3065}, Abstract = {In this paper we investigate the specification and verification of infor- mation systems with an organizational structure. Such systems are modelled as a normative multiagent system. To this end we use KBDIOCTL , an extension of BDICTL in which obligations and permissions are represented by directed modal operators. We illustrate how the logic can be used by introducing and discussing various properties of normative systems and individual agents which can be rep- resented in the logic. In particular we discuss the enforcement of norms. }, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/deon04b.pdf} } @InProceedings{Torre2004, Title = {Specifying Multiagent Organizations}, Author = {van der Torre, L. and Hulstijn, J. and Dastani, M. and Broersen, J.}, Booktitle = {In Proceedings of the Seventh Workshop on Deontic Logic in Computer Science (Deon'2004)}, Year = {2004}, Pages = {243-257}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {LNCS}, Volume = {3065}, Abstract = {In this paper we investigate the specification and verification of information systems with an organizational structure. Such systems are modelled as a normative multiagent system. To this end we use KBDIOCTL, an extension of BDICTL in which obligations and permissions are represented by directed modal operators. We illustrate how the logic can be used by introducing and discussing various properties of normative systems and individual agents which can be represented in the logic. In particular we discuss the enforcement of norms.}, Url = {http://www.springerlink.com/content/v5fmwkyc9bufh6ec/} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/caise/TorreLDCA06, Title = {Landscape Maps for Enterprise Architectures.}, Author = {L. van der Torre and M. Lankhorst and H. ter Doest and J. Campschroer and F. Arbab}, Booktitle = {Advanced Information Systems Engineering, 18th International Conference, CAiSE 2006, Luxembourg, Luxembourg, June 5-9, 2006, Proceedings}, Year = {2006}, Editor = {E. Dubois and K. Pohl}, Pages = {351-366}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {4001}, Abstract = {Landscape maps are a technique for visualizing enterprise architectures. They present architectural elements in the form of an easy to understand 2D map. A landscape map view on architectures provides non-technical stakeholders, such as managers, with a high-level overview, without burdening them with technicalities of architectural drawings. In this paper we discuss the use of and techniques for landscape maps. A formal model for landscape maps is introduced as the basis of visualization and interaction techniques. Moreover, we show how a landscape map can be generated from its underlying model. Finally we show several interaction techniques, for example to build a landscape map from scratch, independently of an underlying model, or to change a landscape map together with its underlying model.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/caise06.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/11767138_24}, ISBN = {3-540-34652-X}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/caise06.pdf} } @InProceedings{Torre99TheRole, Title = {The role of diagnosis and decision theory in normative reasoning}, Author = {van der Torre, L. and Ramos, P. and Fiadeiro, J.L. and Tan, Y.-H.}, Booktitle = {Formal Models of Agents (ESPRIT Project ModelAge Final Workshop, Selected Papers)}, Year = {1999}, Editor = {Meyer, Ch. J.-J. and Schobbens, P.-Y.}, Pages = {216-239}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {LNAI}, Volume = {1760}, Abstract = {A theory of diagnosis and qualitative decision theory are able to formalize reasoning with norms. They are thus different from deontic logic, that formalizes reasoning about norms. In this paper, we compare two theories of diagnosis for normative systems: Ramos and Fiadeiro’s theory of diagnosis developed for organizational process design and Tan and Van der Torre’s theory of diagnosis extended with notions of qualitative decision theory. We observe several similarities. }, ISBN = {3-540-67027-0}, Url = {http://www.springerlink.com/content/4c6u4bufrr3ahjch/} } @InCollection{Torre2000DynamicNormative, Title = {Dynamic Normative Reasoning Under Uncertainty: How to Distinguish Between Obligations Under Uncertainty and Prima Facie Obligations}, Author = {van der Torre, L. and Tan, Y.}, Booktitle = {Handbook of Defeasible Reasoning and Uncertainty Management Systems, Vol 6: Agents, Reasoning and Dynamics}, Publisher = {Kluwer}, Year = {2001}, Editor = {Gabbay, D.M. and Smets, Ph.}, Pages = {267-297}, Abstract = {The deontic update semantics is a dynamic semantics for prescriptive obligations based on Veltman's update semantics, in which the dynamic evaluation of conflicts of hierarchic obligations naturally leads to defeasibility. In this paper we use this dynamic semantics to study the diagnostic problem of defeasible deontic logic. For example, consider a defeasible obligation `ff ought to be done' together with the fact `:ff is done' under uncertainty. Is there an exception of the normality claim, or is it a violation of the obligation? We show that to answer this question a distinction has to be made between `normally ff ought to be done' and `prima facie ff ought to be done.'}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/drums00.ps.Z}, Date-modified = {2011-12-20 17:13:30 +0100}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/drums00.ps.Z} } @InCollection{Torre99AnUpdateSemantics, Title = {An update semantics for deontic reasoning}, Author = {van der Torre, L. and Tan, Y>}, Booktitle = {Norms, Logics and Information Systems. New Studies on Deontic Logic and Computer Science, Volume 49 in Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications}, Publisher = {IOS Press}, Year = {1999}, Editor = {McNamara, P. and Prakken, H.}, Pages = {73-90}, Abstract = {In this paper we propose the deontic logic DUS, that formalizes reasoning about prescriptive obligations in update semantics. In DUS the definition of logical validity of obligations is not based on truth values but on action dynamics. You know the meaning of a normative sentence if you know the change it brings about in the ideality relation of anyone the news conveyed by the norm applies to. }, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/deon98full.ps.Z} } @InCollection{Torre97TheManyFaces, Title = {The many faces of defeasibility in defeasible deontic logic}, Author = {van der Torre, L. and Tan, Y}, Booktitle = {Defeasible Deontic Logic, volume 263 of Synthese Library}, Publisher = {Kluwer}, Year = {1997}, Editor = {Nute, D.}, Pages = {79-121}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ddl97.ps.Z}, Date-modified = {2011-12-20 17:12:38 +0100}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ddl97.ps.Z} } @InProceedings{Torre98ProhaireticDeontic, Title = {Prohairetic Deontic Logic (PDL)}, Author = {van der Torre, L. and Tan, Y.}, Booktitle = {Logics in Artificial Intelligence. Proceedings of the 6th European Workshop on Logics in AI (JELIA'98)}, Year = {1998}, Pages = {77-91}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {LNAI}, Volume = {1489}, Abstract = {In this paper we introduce Prohairetic Deontic Logic (PDL), a preference-based dyadic deontic logic. An obligation ‘α should be (done) if β is (done)’ is true if (1) no ¬α∧β state is as preferable as an α∧β state and (2) the preferred β states are α states. We show that the different elements of this mixed representation solve different problems of deontic logic. The first part of the definition is used to formalize contrary-to-duty reasoning, that for example occurs in Chisholm’s and Forrester’s notorious deontic paradoxes. The second part is used to make dilemmas inconsistent. PDL shares the intuitive semantics of preference-based deontic logics without introducing additional semantic machinery such as bi-ordering semantics or ceteris paribus preferences. }, Url = {http://www.springerlink.com/content/gwactbelcpx3y2rc} } @InProceedings{Torre98UpdateSemantics, Title = {An update semantics for deontic reasoning}, Author = {van der Torre, L. and Tan, Y.}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the Fourth Workshop on Deontic Logic in Computer Science (Deon'98)}, Year = {1998}, Pages = {409-426}, Abstract = {In this paper we propose the deontic logic DUS, that formalizes reasoning about prescriptive obligations in update semantics. In DUS the definition of logical validity of obligations is not based on truth values but on action dynamics. You know the meaning of a normative sentence if you know the change it brings about in the betterness relation of anyone who is subjected to the news conveyed by it.}, Date-modified = {2011-12-20 17:14:13 +0100}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/deon98full.ps.Z} } @InProceedings{Torre97ContextualDeontic, Title = {Contextual deontic logic}, Author = {van der Torre, L. and Tan, Y.}, Booktitle = {Formal models of agents}, Year = {1997}, Pages = {240-251}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {LNAI}, Volume = {1760}, Abstract = {In this article we propose contextual deontic logic. Contextual obligations are written as O(α | β∖γ), and are to be read as ‘α should be the case if β is the case, unless is the case’. The unless clause is analogous to the justification in Reiter’s default rules. We show how contextual obligations can be used to solve certain aspects of contrary-to-duty paradoxes of dyadic deontic logic. }, Url = {http://www.springerlink.com/content/a19v6tgt2h8t6qyl/} } @InProceedings{Torre97ContextualDeontic2, Title = {Contextual deontic logic}, Author = {van der Torre, L. and Tan, Y.}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the First International and Interdisciplinary Conference on Modeling and Using Context (CONTEXT'97), Rio de Janeiro}, Year = {1997}, Pages = {1-12}, Abstract = {In this article we propose contextual deontic logic (CDL). Contextual obligations are written as O(ffjfinfl), and are to be read as `ff should be the case if fi is the case, unless fl is the case'. The unless clause is analogous to the justification in Reiter's default rules. We show how contextual obligations can be used to solve certain aspects of contrary-to-duty paradoxes of dyadic deontic logic.}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/context97.ps.Z} } @InProceedings{Torre96CredulousReasining, Title = {Credulous Reasoning About Defaults}, Author = {van der Torre, L. and Tan, Y}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the Asian Conference on Logic, China}, Year = {1996}, Abstract = {In this paper we propose a preference-based conditional logic for credulous reasoning about defaults. A conditional default "if fi then by default ff" is either formalized by the strong preference "fi :ff is not preferred to or equivalent to fi ff", or by the weak preference "the preferred fi is an ff". We show that these two expressions, instances of what we call the ordering and minimizing usages of preference orderings, can be considered as duals of each other. Moreover, we give a formalization of ordering and minimizing in Boutilier's modal logic CT40 and we show how to combine them in a two-phase default logic.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/asian96.ps.Z}, Date-modified = {2011-12-20 17:13:57 +0100}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/asian96.ps.Z} } @InProceedings{Torre98PrimaFacieObligInUpSem, Title = {Prima facie obligations in update semantics}, Author = {Leendert van der Torre and Yao-Hua Tan}, Booktitle = {Proc. 6th European Workshop on Logics in AI: Logics in Artificial Intelligence}, Year = {1998}, Abstract = {The deontic logic DUS is a Deontic Update Semantics for prescriptive obligations based on the update semantics of Veltman. In DUS the definition of logical validity of obligations is not based on static truth values but on dynamic action transitions. In this paper prescriptive prima facie obligations are formalized in update semantics. The logic formalizes the specificity principle, has reinstatement and does not have an irrelevance problem. Moreover, it handles the diagnostic problem by distinguishing between overridden, conflict and factual defeasibility.}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ecai98.ps.Z} } @Misc{TorreHuanTwoPhaseException, Title = {Two-Phase Exception Logic}, Author = {Leendert van der Torre and Yao-Hua Tan}, Year = {1998}, Abstract = {In this paper we propose an exception logic - formalizing reasoning about exceptions. We use this logic to defend two claims. First, we argue that default logic - formalizing reasoning about default assumptions - is an extension of exception logic. A deconstruction argument shows that reasoning about exception is one of the first principles of reasoning about default assumptions. Second, we argue that two phases have to be distinguished in reasoning about default assumptions. We identify two causes of the distinction between two phases, the disjunction rule OR and right weakening RW. This sheds some new light on these 'standard' (according to the Kraus-Lehmann-Magidor paradigm) properties of default inference.}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/2el.ps.Z} } @Book{torre1997reasoning, Title = {Reasoning about obligations: defeasibility in preference-based deontic logic}, Author = {Torre, L.W.N. and Torre, L.}, Publisher = {Thesis}, Year = {1997}, Series = {Tinbergen Institute research series}, Abstract = {This thesis develops several preference-based deontic logics, and a classification of several types of defeasibility in preference-based deontic logic. The classification discriminates between exceptions and violations. For example, consider the obligation that normally, you ought to keep your promises, and the fact that you do not keep your promise. Is this an exception of the normality claim, or is it a violation of the obligation to keep your promise? The formal classification avoids this kind of confusion.}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/thesis.pdf} } @InProceedings{Torre2000Recognizing, Title = {Agents recognizing emergence}, Author = {van der Torre, L. and Wan, F.}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the Belgium/Dutch AI Conference (BNAIC'2000), Kaatsheuvel}, Year = {2000}, Pages = {45-52}, Abstract = {Agents that recognize self organizing systems and their emergent properties have a competitive advantage. In this paper we introduce a classication of self-organizing systems based on phase transitions, macroscopic dynamic structures, evolution, self-regulation, and ultra-stability. Sometimes the agent can recognize the type of self-organizing system by observing its internal mechanisms such as feedback mechanisms or essential variables, but in general he has to interpret the system's behavior and in particular its relation with the environment. The agent therefore uses besides theories of self-organization also theories of cybernetics.}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/bnaic00.ps} } @InProceedings{Torre99ContextualDeontic2, Title = {Risk parameters for utilitarian desires (extended abstract)}, Author = {van der Torre, L. and Weydert, E.}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the IJCAI'99 Workshop on Practial Reasoning and Rationality (PRR'99)}, Year = {1999}, Pages = {48-54}, Abstract = {In qualitative decision-theoretic planning desires -- qualitative abstractions of utility functions -- are combined with defaults -- qualitative abstractions of probability distributions -- to calculate the expected utilities of actions. In this paper we consider Lang's framework of qualitative decision theory, in which utility functions are constructed from desires. Unfortunately there is no consensus about the desired logical properties of desires, in contrast to the case for defaults. To do justice to the wide variety of desires we define parameterized desires in an extension of Lang's framework. There are three parameters. The strength parameter encodes the importance of the desire, the lifting parameter encodes how to determine the utility of a set from the utilities of its elements, and the polarity parameter encodes the relation between gain of utility for rewards and loss of utility for violations. The parameters influence how desires interact, and they thus increase the control on the construction process of utility functions from desires.}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ijcai99b.pdf} } @InProceedings{Torre98GoalsDesires, Title = {Goals, desires, utilities and preferences}, Author = {van der Torre, L. and Weydert, E.}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the ECAI'98 Workshop on Decision Theory meets Artificial Intelligence}, Year = {1998}, Abstract = {In this paper we study the logic of goals, which are formalized as desires with an utilitarian semantics. In our framework goals have a dual character, because they are constraints on utility functions as well as constructors of these utility functions. The non-monotonic reasoning related to the constructors reflects that goals are used as heuristic approximations of preferences in decision making and planning. Moreover, our framework is based on bipolar additive preferences, where bipolarity means that goals can either result in a gain of utility if achieved, or a loss of utility if not achieved. The framework is used to illustrate different types of context-dependence and conflicts of goals.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/gtdt99.ps.Z}, Date-modified = {2011-12-20 17:13:22 +0100}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/gtdt99.ps.Z} } @InProceedings{Torre97prohaireticdeontic, Title = {Prohairetic Deontic Logic and Qualitative Decision Theory}, Author = {Torre, L.W.N. van der and Yao-hua Tan}, Booktitle = {In Proceedings of the AAAI Spring Symposium on Qualitative Approaches to Deliberation and Reasoning}, Year = {1997}, Publisher = {AAAI Press}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/aaai97.ps.Z} } @Misc{Torre99labelledlogics, Title = {Labelled Logics of Defeasible Goals}, Author = {Leendert W.N. van der Torre}, Year = {1999}, Abstract = {In this paper we study conflicts between goals. In line with negative results obtained in the logic of preference, we argue that most proof rules of the logic of goals - such as strengthening of the antecedent (monotony), transitivity and the conjunction rule - only hold in a restricted sense. We study restricted applicability in Gabbay's labelled deductive systems, and we show how to resolve conflicts in labelled logics of conditional goals.}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/dgnmr99.ps.Z} } @InProceedings{Torre98deliberaterobbery, Title = {Deliberate Robbery, or the Calculating Samaritan}, Author = {Leendert W.N. van der Torre and Yao-hua Tan}, Booktitle = {In Proceedings of the ECAI'98 Workshop on Practical Reasoning and Rationality (PRR'98}, Year = {1998}, Abstract = {In this paper we introduce the deliberating robber, an example of reasoning about preferences in a logic of desires. We show that two defeasible reasoning schemes proposed in qualitative decision theory derive counterintuitive consequences.}, Slides = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/naic98-slides.ps.Z}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/prr98.ps.Z} } @InProceedings{Torre1997, Title = {Prohairetic Deontic Logic (PDL)}, Author = {Leendert W.N. van der Torre and Yao-hua Tan}, Booktitle = {In Proceedings of the AAAI Spring Symposium on Qualitative Approaches to Deliberation and Reasoning}, Year = {1997}, Publisher = {AAAI Press}, Abstract = {In this paper we introduce Prohairetic Deontic Logic (PDL), a preference-based dyadic deontic logic. An obligation `A should be (done) if B is (done)' is true if (1) no -A/\B state is as preferable as an A/\B state and (2) the preferred B states are A states. We show that the different elements of this mixed representation solve different problems of deontic logic. The first part of the definition is used to formalize contrary-to-duty reasoning, that for example occurs in Chisholm's and Forrester's notorious paradoxes. The second part is used to make dilemmas inconsistent. PDL shares the intuitive semantics of preference-based deontic logics without introducing additional semantic machinery such as bi-ordering semantics or ceteris paribus preferences.}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/jelia98.ps.Z} } @Article{DBLP:journals/amai/Torre03, Title = {Contextual Deontic Logic: Normative Agents, Violations and Independence}, Author = {Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Journal = {Ann. Math. Artif. Intell.}, Year = {2003}, Number = {1-2}, Pages = {33-63}, Volume = {37}, Abstract = {In this paper we discuss when and how to use deontic logic in multi agent systems. Our central question is how to proceed once a norm has been violated or defeated, a key issue of deontic logic applications in multi agent systems. To bridge the logical analysis of norms in philosophy with applications in agent theory, we propose a practical approach based on violation contexts and independence statements. In particular, we introduce a combination of two traditional deontic logics, which we extend with so-called deontic and factual independence assumptions. We show how different notions of violability and defeasibility can be encoded in the logic by defining different ways in which independence assumptions are derived from the explicit manner of presentation. We also show how our approach can be used to give a new analysis of several notorious paradoxes of deontic logic.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/amai02.ps.Z}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1020207321544}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/amai02.ps.Z} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/ecai/Torre98, Title = {Labeled Logics of Conditional Goals}, Author = {Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {ECAI}, Year = {1998}, Pages = {368-369}, Abstract = {In this paper we introduce labeled logics of conditional goals. The logics have two remarkable properties. First, conflicting goals are consistent, because they can refer to different objectives. Second, a priori problematic combinations - e.g. strengthening of the antecedent and weakening of the consequent - are supported thanks to the labels. They are used to construct complex inductive definitions with several arguments. In the labeled logics we discuss transitivity, formalizing that conditional goals can be applied one after the other, and the disjunction rule, formalizing reasoning by cases. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ecai98yr2.ps.Z}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ecai98yr2.ps.Z} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/ecai/Torre94, Title = {Violated Obligations in a Defeasible Deontic Logic}, Author = {Leendert W. N. van der Torre}, Booktitle = {ECAI}, Year = {1994}, Pages = {371-375}, Abstract = {Deontic logic is characterized by the distinction between the actual and the ideal. In this article we discuss the situation where the actual deviates from the ideal, where obligations are violated. Nonmonotonic logics can be very helpful for the formalization of deontic reasoning, in particular to infer moral cues. It has been argued that the problems related to violated obligations, e.g. the Chisholm `Paradox', are just instances of problems of defeasible reasoning. We disagree with this claim since we will argue that there is a fundamental difference between a violated and a defeated obligation. In this article, we analyze violated obligations in Horty's nonmonotonic framework. We extend his definition of deontic consequence in such a way that it covers violated obligations and we give a solution to deal with conflicts between violability and defeasibility. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ecai94.ps.Z}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ecai94.ps.Z} } @Article{DBLP:journals/ail/TorreT99, Title = {Diagnosis and Decision Making in Normative Reasoning}, Author = {Leendert W. N. van der Torre and Yao-Hua Tan}, Journal = {Artif. Intell. Law}, Year = {1999}, Number = {1}, Pages = {51-67}, Volume = {7}, Abstract = {Diagnosis theory reasons about incomplete knowledge and only considers the past. It distinguishes between violations and non-violations. Qualitative decision theory reasons about decision variables and considers the future. It distinguishes between fulfilled goals and unfulfilled goals. In this paper we formalize normative diagnoses and decisions in the special purpose formalism diOde2 as well as in extensions of the preference-based deontic logic 2dl. The DIagnostic and DEcision-theoretic framework for DEontic reasoning diOde2 formalizes reasoning about violations and fulfillments, and is used to characterize the distinction between normative diagnosis theory and (qualitative) decision theory. The extension of the preference-based deontic logic 2dl shows how normative diagnostic and decision-theoretic reasoning - i.e. reasoning about violations and fulfillments - can be formalized as an extension of deontic reasoning. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ailaw99.ps.Z}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1008359312576}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ailaw99.ps.Z} } @Article{DBLP:journals/amai/TorreT99, Title = {Contrary-to-duty reasoning with preference-based dyadic obligations}, Author = {Leendert W. N. van der Torre and Yao-Hua Tan}, Journal = {Ann. Math. Artif. Intell.}, Year = {1999}, Number = {1-4}, Pages = {49-78}, Volume = {27}, Abstract = {In this paper we introduce Prohairetic Deontic Logic (PDL), a preference-based dyadic deontic logic. In our preference-based interpretation of obligations `A should be (done) if B is (done)' is true if (1) no `not-A and B' state is as preferable as an `A and B' state and (2) the preferred B states are A states. We show that this representation solves different problems of deontic logic. The first part of the definition is used to formalize contrary-to-duty reasoning, that for example occurs in Chisholm's and Forrester's notorious deontic paradoxes. The second part is used to make deontic dilemmas inconsistent. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/amai99.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1018975332469}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/amai99.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/aaai/TorreT98, Title = {The Temporal Analysis of Chisholm's Paradox}, Author = {Leendert W. N. van der Torre and Yao-Hua Tan}, Booktitle = {AAAI/IAAI}, Year = {1998}, Pages = {650-655}, Abstract = {Deontic logic, the logic of obligations and permissions, is plagued by several paradoxes that have to be understood before deontic logic can be used as a knowledge representation language. In this paper we extend the temporal analysis of Chisholm's paradox using a deontic logic that combines temporal and preferential notions.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/aaai98.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Date-modified = {2011-12-20 17:12:32 +0100}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/aaai98.pdf} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/ecai/TorreT98, Title = {An Update Semantics for Prima Facie Obligations}, Author = {Leendert W. N. van der Torre and Yao-Hua Tan}, Booktitle = {ECAI}, Year = {1998}, Pages = {38-42}, Abstract = {The deontic logic dus is a deontic update semantics for prescriptive obligations based on the update semantics of Veltman. In dus the definition of logical validity of obligations is not based on static truth values but on dynamic action transitions. In this paper prescriptive prima facie obligations are formalized in update semantics. The logic formalizes the specificity principle, has reinstatement and does not have an irrelevance problem. Moreover, it handles the diagnostic problem by distinguishing between overridden, conflict and factual defeasibility.}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ecai98.ps.Z} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/icail/TorreT97, Title = {Distinguishing Different Roles in Normative Reasoning}, Author = {Leendert W. N. van der Torre and Yao-Hua Tan}, Booktitle = {ICAIL}, Year = {1997}, Pages = {225-232}, Abstract = {In this paper we introduce the diagnostic and decision- theoretic framework for deontic reasoning diO(de) 2 . The framework diO(de) 2 formalizes reasoning about violations and goals. We use this framework to discuss two theories of normative reasoning, diagnosis theory and (qualitative) decision theory. A crucial distinction between the two theories is their perspective on time. Diagnosis theory reasons about incomplete knowledge and only considers the past. It distinguishes between violations and non-violations. Qualitative decision theory reasons about decision variables and considers the future. It distinguishes between fulfilled obligations and unfulfilled obligations. Moreover, we discuss the relation between the two theories of normative reasoning and deontic logic. The theories formalize reasoning with norms, and they are thus different from deontic logic, that formalizes reasoning about norms.}, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/icail97.ps.Z}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Date-modified = {2011-12-20 17:13:40 +0100}, Ee = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/261618.261657}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/icail97.ps.Z} } @InProceedings{DBLP:conf/ijcai/TorreT95, Title = {Cancelling and Overshadowing: Two Types of Defeasibility in Defeasible Deontic Logic}, Author = {Leendert W. N. van der Torre and Yao-Hua Tan}, Booktitle = {IJCAI}, Year = {1995}, Pages = {1525-1533}, Abstract = {In this paper we give a general analysis of dyadic deontic logics that were introduced in the early seventies to formalize deontic reasoning about subideal behavior. Recently it was observed that they are closely related to nonmonotonic logics, theories of diagnosis and decision theories. In particular, we argue that two types of defeasibility must be distinguished in a defeasible deontic logic: overridden defeasibility that formalizes cancelling of an obligation by other conditional obligations and factual defeasibility that formalizes overshadowing of an obligation by a violating fact. We also show that this distinction is essential for an adequate analysis of notorious `paradoxes' of deontic logic such as the Chisholm and Forrester `Paradoxes'.}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/ijcai95.ps.Z} } @Article{DBLP:journals/apin/TorreW01, Title = {Parameters for Utilitarian Desires in a Qualitative Decision Theory}, Author = {Leendert W. N. van der Torre and Emil Weydert}, Journal = {Appl. Intell.}, Year = {2001}, Number = {3}, Pages = {285-301}, Volume = {14}, Abstract = {In qualitative decision-theoretic planning, desires - qualitative abstractions of utility functions - are combined with defaults - qualitative abstractions of probability distributions - to calculate the expected utilities of actions. This paper is inspired from Lang's framework of qualitative decision theory, in which utility functions are constructed from desires. Unfortunately, there is no consensus about the desirable logical properties of desires, in contrast to the case for defaults. To do justice to the wide variety of desires we define parameterized desires in an extension of Lang's framework. We introduce three parameters, which help us to implement different facets of risk. The strength parameter encodes the importance of the desire, the lifting parameter encodes how to determine the utility of a set (proposition) from the utilities of its elements (worlds), and the polarity parameter encodes the relation between gain of utility for rewards and loss of utility for violations. The parameters influence how desires interact, and they thus increase the control on the construction process of utility functions from desires. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/apin01.pdf}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1011246803923}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/apin01.pdf} } @InProceedings{UpdateSemanticsNlis98, Title = {An Update Semantics for Deontic Reasoning}, Author = {Torre, L.W.N. van der, and Tan, Y.-H.}, Booktitle = {International Workshop on Natural Language and Information Systems NLIS'98}, Year = {1998}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/nlis98.ps.Z} } @InProceedings{DistinguishingNaic97, Title = {Distinguishing Different Roles in Normative Reasoning}, Author = {Torre, L.W.N. van der, and Tan, Y.-H.}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the 9th Dutch Conference on Artificial Intelligence (NAICÕ97)}, Year = {1997}, File = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/naic972.ps.Z}, Url = {http://dl.acm.org/authorize?95491} } @InProceedings{UpdateSemanticsNaic97, Title = {An Update Semantics for Deontic Reasoning}, Author = {Torre, L.W.N. van der, and Tan, Y.-H.}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the 9th Dutch Conference on Artificial Intelligence (NAICÕ97)}, Year = {1997}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/naic971.ps.Z} } @Other{10993/1076, Title = {Contrary-To-Duties in Games}, Author = {Turrini, P. and Parent, X. and van der Torre, L. and Colombo Tosatto, S.}, Publisher = {Springer}, Timestamp = {2015.01.26}, Year = {2012} } @Article{van2000two, Title = {Two-phase deontic logic}, Author = {Van der Torre, L. and Tan, Y.H.}, Journal = {Logique et Analyse}, Year = {2000}, Pages = {411--456}, Volume = {43}, Abstract = {We show that for the adequate representation of some examples of normative reasoning a combination of different operators is needed, where each operator validates different inference rules. The combination of different modal operators imposes the restriction on the proof theory of the logic that a proof rule can be blocked in a derivation due to the fact that another proof rule has been used earlier in the derivation. In this paper we only use two operators and therefore we call the restriction the two-phase approach in the proof theory, which we formalize in two-phase labeled deontic logic (2LDL) and in two-phase dyadic deontic logic (2dl). The preference-based semantics of 2DL is based on an explicit deontic preference ordering between worlds, representing different degrees of ideality. The two different modal operators represent two different usages of the preference ordering, called minimizing and ordering. }, Bdsk-url-1 = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/leta02.ps.Z}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/leta02.ps.Z} } @Article{10993/14506, Title = {A logic of argumentation for specification and verification of abstract argumentation frameworks}, Author = {Villata, S. and Boella, G. and Gabbay, D. M. and van der Torre, L.}, Year = {2012}, Publisher = {Springer}, Timestamp = {2015.01.26} } @Article{10993/14507, Title = {Modelling defeasible and prioritized support in bipolar argumentation}, Author = {Villata, S. and Boella, G. and Gabbay, D. M. and van der Torre, L.}, Year = {2012}, Publisher = {Springer Science \& Business Media B.V.}, Timestamp = {2015.01.26} } @InProceedings{BGTV10, Title = {Arguing about Trust in Multiagent Systems}, Author = {Serena Villata and Guido Boella and Dov M. Gabbay and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the 11th Symposium on Artificial Intelligence of the Italian Association for Artificial Intelligence (AIIA'10)}, Year = {2010}, Pages = {236-243}, Abstract = {Trust in multiagent systems is used for seeking to minimize the uncertainty in the interactions among the agents. In this paper, we discuss how to use argumentation to reason about trust. Using the methodology of meta-argumentation, first we represent the source of the information from which the argument is constructed in the abstract argumentation framework capturing the fact that b is attacked because b is from a particular source s. We show how a source of information can be attacked if it is not evaluated as trustworthy. Second, we provide a fine grained representation of the trust relationships between the information sources in which trust concerns not only the sources but also the single arguments and attack relations the sources propose. Moreover, we represent the evidences in support of the arguments which are put forward by the information sources and the agents can express arguments by referring to other agents' arguments. Meta-argumentation allows us not to extend Dung's abstract argumentation framework by introducing trust and to reuse those principles and properties defined for Dung's framework.}, Affiliation = {icr}, Url = {http://publications.uni.lu/record/5686} } @InProceedings{YiZhou2008, Title = {Goal Change in the Context of Beliefs: Partial Implication, Logical Properties, and Complexity}, Author = {Yi Zhou, Leendert van der Torre, Yan Zhang}, Booktitle = {Proc. of 7th Int. Conf. on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2008)}, Year = {2008}, Abstract = {Partial implication semantics in the context of a background theory has been introduced to formalize partial goal satisfaction in the context of beliefs. In this paper, we introduce strong partial implication prohibiting redundancies and weak partial implication allowing side effects, we study their semantic as well as complexity properties, and we apply the three notions of partial implication to goal change in the context of beliefs.}, Url = {http://icr.uni.lu/leonvandertorre/papers/aamas08.pdf} } @InProceedings{vanzee-etal:ijcai2015, Title = {AGM Revision of Beliefs about Action and Time}, Author = {Marc van Zee and Mehdi Dastani and Dragan Doder and Leendert van der Torre}, Booktitle = {Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence}, Year = {2015}, Month = {July}, Abstract = {The AGM theory of belief revision is based on propositional belief sets. In this paper we develop a logic for revision of temporal belief bases, containing expressions about temporal propositions (tomorrow it will rain), possibility (it may rain tomorrow), actions (the robot enters the room) and pre- and post-conditions of these actions. We prove the Katsuno-Mendelzon and the Darwiche-Pearl representation theorems by restricting the logic to formulas representing beliefs up to certain time. We illustrate our belief change model through several examples.}, Url = {https://www.academia.edu/12200284/AGM_Revision_of_Beliefs_about_Action_and_Time} } @Other{10993/15235, Title = {Agent Programming Languages Requirements for Programming Autonomous Robots}, Author = {Ziafati, P. and Dastani, M. and Meyer, J.-J. and van der Torre, L.}, Publisher = {Springer Berlin Heidelberg}, Timestamp = {2015.01.26}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-38700-5\_3}, Year = {2013} } @Other{10993/15238, Title = {Event-processing in Autonomous Robot Programming}, Author = {Ziafati, P. and Dastani, M. and Meyer, J.-J. and van der Torre, L.}, Publisher = {International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems}, Timestamp = {2015.01.26}, Url = {http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2484920.2484939}, Year = {2013} } @Other{10993/14504, Title = {Agent Programming Languages Requirements for Programming Cognitive Robots (extended abstract)}, Abstract = {This paper presents various requirements for BDI-based agent programming languages to provide better support for implementing autonomous robotic control systems. Examples of such requirements are: 1- Built-in support for integration with existing robotic frameworks such as ROS, 2- Real-time reactivity to events, 3- Management of heterogeneous sensory data and reasoning on complex events, and 4- Representation of complex plans and coordination of the parallel execution of plans.}, Author = {Ziafati, P. and Dastani, M. and Meyer, J.-J. and van der Torre, L.}, Timestamp = {2015.01.26}, Year = {2012} } @Other{10993/13873, Title = {Reasoning on Robot Knowledge from Discrete and Asynchronous Observations}, Abstract = {Robot knowledge of the world is created from discrete and asynchronous events received from its perception components. Proper representation and maintenance of robot knowledge is crucial to enable the use of robot knowledge for planning, user-interaction, etc. This paper identifies some of the main issues related to the representation, maintenance and querying of robot knowledge based on discrete asynchronous events such as event-history management and synchronization, and introduces a language for simplifying developers\text{'} job at making a suitable representation of robot knowledge.}, Author = {Ziafati, P. and Elrakaiby, Y. and van der Torre, L. and Voos, H. and Dastani, M. and Meyer, J.-J. and Van Zee, M.}, Timestamp = {2015.01.26}, Year = {2014} } @Other{10993/16954, Title = {A Library for Event-Processing and Adaptable Component Interactions in Autonomous Robot Software}, Abstract = {A light-weight framework-independent software library\text{[D?]}is introduced to facilitate a modular and systematic development\text{[D?]}of sensory management components for an autonomous\text{[D?]}robot. Such components are used to implement complex eventprocessing\text{[D?]}tasks such as content-based filtering, integration and\text{[D?]}transformation of sensory data. In addition, they can be used\text{[D?]}as mediators to provide a number of high-level interaction\text{[D?]}mechanisms among a robot\text{'}s software components. To this end,\text{[D?]}they enable components with subscription to their events of\text{[D?]}interest, asynchronous reception of events, maintaining necessary\text{[D?]}histories of events and querying of the histories at runtime.}, Author = {Ziafati, P. and Voos, H. and van der Torre, L. and Dastani, M. and Meyer, J.-J.}, Timestamp = {2015.01.26}, Year = {2013} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/stairs/2010, Title = {STAIRS 2010 - Proceedings of the Fifth Starting AI Researchers' Symposium, Lisbon, Portugal, 16-20 August, 2010}, Year = {2010}, Editor = {Thomas {\AA}gotnes}, Publisher = {IOS Press}, Series = {Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications}, Volume = {222}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {STAIRS}, ISBN = {978-1-60750-675-1} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/deon/2012, Title = {Deontic Logic in Computer Science - 11th International Conference, DEON 2012, Bergen, Norway, July 16-18, 2012. Proceedings}, Year = {2012}, Editor = {Thomas {\AA}gotnes and Jan Broersen and Dag Elgesem}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {7393}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {DEON}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31570-1}, ISBN = {978-3-642-31569-5} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/jelia/2004, Title = {Logics in Artificial Intelligence, 9th European Conference, JELIA 2004, Lisbon, Portugal, September 27-30, 2004, Proceedings}, Year = {2004}, Editor = {Jos{\'e} J{\'u}lio Alferes and Jo{\~a}o Alexandre Leite}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {3229}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {JELIA}, ISBN = {3-540-23242-7} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/woa/2003, Title = {WOA 2003: Dagli Oggetti agli Agenti. 4th AI*IA/TABOO Joint Workshop "From Objects to Agents": Intelligent Systems and Pervasive Computing, 10-11 September 2003, Villasimius, CA, Italy}, Year = {2003}, Editor = {Giuliano Armano and Flavio De Paoli and Andrea Omicini and Eloisa Vargiu}, Publisher = {Pitagora Editrice Bologna}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {WOA}, ISBN = {88-371-1413-3} } @Proceedings{Artikis2012, Title = {Logic Programs, Norms and Action - Essays in Honor of Marek J. Sergot on the Occasion of His 60th Birthday}, Year = {2012}, Editor = {Alexander Artikis and Robert Craven and Nihan Kesim Cicekli and Babak Sadighi and Kostas Stathis}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {7360}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {Logic Programs, Norms and Action}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29414-3}, ISBN = {978-3-642-29413-6} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/birthday/2012sergot, Title = {Logic Programs, Norms and Action - Essays in Honor of Marek J. Sergot on the Occasion of His 60th Birthday}, Year = {2012}, Editor = {Alexander Artikis and Robert Craven and Nihan Kesim Cicekli and Babak Sadighi and Kostas Stathis}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {7360}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {Logic Programs, Norms and Action}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29414-3}, ISBN = {978-3-642-29413-6} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/lpar/2002, Title = {Logic for Programming, Artificial Intelligence, and Reasoning, 9th International Conference, LPAR 2002, Tbilisi, Georgia, October 14-18, 2002, Proceedings}, Year = {2002}, Editor = {Matthias Baaz and Andrei Voronkov}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {2514}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {LPAR}, ISBN = {3-540-00010-0} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/woa/2004, Title = {WOA 2004: Dagli Oggetti agli Agenti. 5th AI*IA/TABOO Joint Workshop "From Objects to Agents": Complex Systems and Rational Agents, 30 November - 1 December 2004, Torino, Italy}, Year = {2004}, Editor = {Matteo Baldoni and Flavio De Paoli and Alberto Martelli and Andrea Omicini}, Publisher = {Pitagora Editrice Bologna}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {WOA}, ISBN = {88-371-1533-4} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/kr/2014, Title = {Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Conference, {KR} 2014, Vienna, Austria, July 20-24, 2014}, Year = {2014}, Editor = {Chitta Baral and Giuseppe De Giacomo and Thomas Eiter}, Publisher = {{AAAI} Press}, Bibsource = {dblp computer science bibliography, http://dblp.org}, Biburl = {http://dblp.uni-trier.de/rec/bib/conf/kr/2014}, ISBN = {978-1-57735-657-8}, Timestamp = {Thu, 31 Jul 2014 10:24:17 +0200}, Url = {http://www.aaai.org/Library/KR/kr14contents.php} } @Proceedings{Bassiliades2011, Title = {Rule-Based Reasoning, Programming, and Applications - 5th International Symposium, RuleML 2011 - Europe, Barcelona, Spain, July 19-21, 2011. Proceedings}, Year = {2011}, Editor = {Nick Bassiliades and Guido Governatori and Adrian Paschke}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {6826}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {RuleML Europe}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22546-8}, ISBN = {978-3-642-22545-1} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/ruleml/2011e, Title = {Rule-Based Reasoning, Programming, and Applications - 5th International Symposium, RuleML 2011 - Europe, Barcelona, Spain, July 19-21, 2011. Proceedings}, Year = {2011}, Editor = {Nick Bassiliades and Guido Governatori and Adrian Paschke}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {6826}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {RuleML Europe}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22546-8}, ISBN = {978-3-642-22545-1} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/ecsqaru/2001, Title = {Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty, 6th European Conference, ECSQARU 2001, Toulouse, France, September 19-21, 2001, Proceedings}, Year = {2001}, Editor = {Salem Benferhat and Philippe Besnard}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {2143}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {ECSQARU}, ISBN = {3-540-42464-4} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/nmr/2002, Title = {9th International Workshop on Non-Monotonic Reasoning (NMR 2002), April 19-21, Toulouse, France, Proceedings}, Year = {2002}, Editor = {Salem Benferhat and Enrico Giunchiglia}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {NMR} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/dagstuhl/2007P7122, Title = {Normative Multi-agent Systems, 18.03. - 23.03.2007}, Year = {2007}, Editor = {Guido Boella and Leendert W. N. van der Torre and Harko Verhagen}, Publisher = {Internationales Begegnungs- und Forschungszentrum f{\"u}r Informatik (IBFI), Schloss Dagstuhl, Germany}, Series = {Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings}, Volume = {07122}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {Normative Multi-agent Systems} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/atal/2005w, Title = {Coordination, Organizations, Institutions, and Norms in Multi-Agent Systems, AAMAS 2005 International Workshops on Agents, Norms and Institutions for Regulated Multi-Agent Systems, ANIREM 2005, and Organizations in Multi-Agent Systems, OOOP 2005, Utrecht, The Netherlands, July 25-26, 2005, Revised Selected Papers}, Year = {2006}, Editor = {Olivier Boissier and Julian A. Padget and Virginia Dignum and Gabriela Lindemann and Eric T. Matson and Sascha Ossowski and Jaime Sim{\~a}o Sichman and Javier V{\'a}zquez-Salceda}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {3913}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {AAMAS Workshops}, ISBN = {3-540-35173-6} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/loft/2008, Title = {Logic and the Foundations of Game and Decision Theory - LOFT 8, 8th International Conference, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, July 3-5, 2008, Revised Selected Papers}, Year = {2010}, Editor = {Giacomo Bonanno and Benedikt L{\"o}we and Wiebe van der Hoek}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {6006}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {LOFT}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-15164-4}, ISBN = {978-3-642-15163-7} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/promas/2005, Title = {Programming Multi-Agent Systems, Third International Workshop, ProMAS 2005, Utrecht, The Netherlands, July 26, 2005, Revised and Invited Papers}, Year = {2006}, Editor = {Rafael H. Bordini and Mehdi Dastani and J{\"u}rgen Dix and Amal El Fallah-Seghrouchni}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {3862}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {PROMAS}, ISBN = {3-540-32616-2} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/context/1999, Title = {Modeling and Using Context, Second International and Interdisciplinary Conference, CONTEXT'99, Trento, Italy, September 1999, Proceedings}, Year = {1999}, Editor = {Paolo Bouquet and Luciano Serafini and Patrick Br{\'e}zillon and Massimo Benerecetti and F. Castellani}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {1688}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {CONTEXT}, ISBN = {3-540-66432-7} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/kr/2012, Title = {Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Conference, KR 2012, Rome, Italy, June 10-14, 2012}, Year = {2012}, Editor = {Gerhard Brewka and Thomas Eiter and Sheila A. McIlraith}, Publisher = {AAAI Press}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {KR}, ISBN = {978-1-57735-560-1} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/ki/1997, Title = {KI-97: Advances in Artificial Intelligence, 21st Annual German Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Freiburg, Germany, September 9-12, 1997, Proceedings}, Year = {1997}, Editor = {Gerhard Brewka and Christopher Habel and Bernhard Nebel}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {1303}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {KI}, ISBN = {3-540-63493-2} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/deon/1996, Title = {Deontic Logic, Agency and Normative Systems, DEON '96: Third International Workshop on Deontic Logic in Computer Science, Sesimbra, Portugal, 11-13 January 1996}, Year = {1996}, Editor = {Mark A. Brown and Jos{\'e} Carmo}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Workshops in Computing}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {DEON}, ISBN = {3-540-76015-6} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/clima/2014, Title = {Computational Logic in Multi-Agent Systems - 15th International Workshop, {CLIMA} XV, Prague, Czech Republic, August 18-19, 2014. Proceedings}, Year = {2014}, Editor = {Nils Bulling and Leendert W. N. van der Torre and Serena Villata and Wojtek Jamroga and Wamberto Weber Vasconcelos}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {8624}, Bibsource = {dblp computer science bibliography, http://dblp.org}, Biburl = {http://dblp.uni-trier.de/rec/bib/conf/clima/2014}, Doi = {10.1007/978-3-319-09764-0}, ISBN = {978-3-319-09763-3}, Timestamp = {Wed, 08 Apr 2015 16:02:34 +0200}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09764-0} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/argnlp/2014, Title = {Proceedings of the Workshop on Frontiers and Connections between Argumentation Theory and Natural Language Processing, Forl{\`{\i}}-Cesena, Italy, July 21-25, 2014}, Year = {2014}, Editor = {Elena Cabrio and Serena Villata and Adam Wyner}, Publisher = {CEUR-WS.org}, Series = {{CEUR} Workshop Proceedings}, Volume = {1341}, Bibsource = {dblp computer science bibliography, http://dblp.org}, Biburl = {http://dblp.uni-trier.de/rec/bib/conf/argnlp/2014}, Timestamp = {Wed, 15 Apr 2015 21:30:55 +0200}, Url = {http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1341} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/aiia/2003, Title = {AI*IA 2003: Advances in Artificial Intelligence, 8th Congress of the Italian Association for Artificial Intelligence, Pisa, Italy, September 23-26, 2003, Proceedings}, Year = {2003}, Editor = {Amedeo Cappelli and Franco Turini}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {2829}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {AI*IA}, ISBN = {3-540-20119-X} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/deon/2014, Title = {Deontic Logic and Normative Systems - 12th International Conference, {DEON} 2014, Ghent, Belgium, July 12-15, 2014. Proceedings}, Year = {2014}, Editor = {Fabrizio Cariani and Davide Grossi and Joke Meheus and Xavier Parent}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {8554}, Bibsource = {dblp computer science bibliography, http://dblp.org}, Biburl = {http://dblp.uni-trier.de/rec/bib/conf/deon/2014}, Doi = {10.1007/978-3-319-08615-6}, ISBN = {978-3-319-08614-9}, Timestamp = {Wed, 02 Jul 2014 10:23:34 +0200}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08615-6} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/deon/2014, Title = {Deontic Logic and Normative Systems - 12th International Conference, {DEON} 2014, Ghent, Belgium, July 12-15, 2014. Proceedings}, Year = {2014}, Editor = {Fabrizio Cariani and Davide Grossi and Joke Meheus and Xavier Parent}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {8554}, Bibsource = {dblp computer science bibliography, http://dblp.org}, Biburl = {http://dblp.uni-trier.de/rec/bib/conf/deon/2014}, Doi = {10.1007/978-3-319-08615-6}, ISBN = {978-3-319-08614-9}, Timestamp = {Wed, 02 Jul 2014 10:23:34 +0200}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08615-6} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/jurix/2009aicol, Title = {AI Approaches to the Complexity of Legal Systems. Complex Systems, the Semantic Web, Ontologies, Argumentation, and Dialogue - International Workshops AICOL-I/IVR-XXIV Beijing, China, September 19, 2009 and AICOL-II/JURIX 2009, Rotterdam,The Netherlands, December 16, 2009 Revised Selected Papers}, Year = {2010}, Editor = {Pompeu Casanovas and Ugo Pagallo and Giovanni Sartor and Gianmaria Ajani}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {6237}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {AICOL Workshops}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-16524-5}, ISBN = {978-3-642-16523-8} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/jelia/2012, Title = {Logics in Artificial Intelligence - 13th European Conference, JELIA 2012, Toulouse, France, September 26-28, 2012. Proceedings}, Year = {2012}, Editor = {Luis Fari{\~n}as del Cerro and Andreas Herzig and J{\'e}r{\^o}me Mengin}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {7519}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {JELIA}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33353-8}, ISBN = {978-3-642-33352-1} } @Proceedings{Coelho2010, Title = {ECAI 2010 - 19th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Lisbon, Portugal, August 16-20, 2010, Proceedings}, Year = {2010}, Editor = {Helder Coelho and Rudi Studer and Michael Wooldridge}, Publisher = {IOS Press}, Series = {Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications}, Volume = {215}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {ECAI}, Ee = {http://www.booksonline.iospress.nl/Content/View.aspx?piid=17702}, ISBN = {978-1-60750-605-8} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/ecai/2010, Title = {ECAI 2010 - 19th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Lisbon, Portugal, August 16-20, 2010, Proceedings}, Year = {2010}, Editor = {Helder Coelho and Rudi Studer and Michael Wooldridge}, Publisher = {IOS Press}, Series = {Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications}, Volume = {215}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {ECAI}, Ee = {http://www.booksonline.iospress.nl/Content/View.aspx?piid=17702}, ISBN = {978-1-60750-605-8} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/woa/2005, Title = {WOA 2005: Dagli Oggetti agli Agenti. 6th AI*IA/TABOO Joint Workshop "From Objects to Agents": Simulation and Formal Analysis of Complex Systems, 14-16 November 2005, Camerino, MC, Italy}, Year = {2005}, Editor = {Flavio Corradini and Flavio De Paoli and Emanuela Merelli and Andrea Omicini}, Publisher = {Pitagora Editrice Bologna}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {WOA}, ISBN = {88-371-1590-3} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/dbsec/2012, Title = {Data and Applications Security and Privacy XXVI - 26th Annual IFIP WG 11.3 Conference, DBSec 2012, Paris, France, July 11-13,2012. Proceedings}, Year = {2012}, Editor = {Nora Cuppens-Boulahia and Fr{\'e}d{\'e}ric Cuppens and Joaqu\'{\i}n Garc\'{\i}a-Alfaro}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {7371}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {DBSec}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31540-4}, ISBN = {978-3-642-31539-8} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/ijcai/99, Title = {Proceedings of the Sixteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI 99, Stockholm, Sweden, July 31 - August 6, 1999. 2 Volumes, 1450 pages}, Year = {1999}, Editor = {Thomas Dean}, Publisher = {Morgan Kaufmann}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, ISBN = {1-55860-613-0} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/nmr/2004, Title = {10th International Workshop on Non-Monotonic Reasoning (NMR 2004), Whistler, Canada, June 6-8, 2004, Proceedings}, Year = {2004}, Editor = {James P. Delgrande and Torsten Schaub}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {NMR}, ISBN = {92-990021-0-X} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/atal/2005, Title = {4th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2005), July 25-29, 2005, Utrecht, The Netherlands}, Year = {2005}, Editor = {Frank Dignum and Virginia Dignum and Sven Koenig and Sarit Kraus and Munindar P. Singh and Michael Wooldridge}, Publisher = {ACM}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {AAMAS}, ISBN = {1-59593-094-9} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/jelia/1998, Title = {Logics in Artificial Intelligence, European Workshop, JELIA '98, Dagstuhl, Germany, October 12-15, 1998, Proceedings}, Year = {1998}, Editor = {J{\"u}rgen Dix and Luis Fari{\~n}as del Cerro and Ulrich Furbach}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {1489}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {JELIA}, ISBN = {3-540-65141-1} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/kr/2004, Title = {Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference (KR2004), Whistler, Canada, June 2-5, 2004}, Year = {2004}, Editor = {Didier Dubois and Christopher A. Welty and Mary-Anne Williams}, Publisher = {AAAI Press}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {KR}, ISBN = {1-57735-199-1} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/atal/2004trust, Title = {Trusting Agents for Trusting Electronic Societies, Theory and Applications in HCI and E-Commerce}, Year = {2005}, Editor = {Rino Falcone and K. Suzanne Barber and Jordi Sabater-Mir and Munindar P. Singh}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {3577}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {Trusting Agents for Trusting Electronic Societies}, ISBN = {3-540-28012-X} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/ecsqaru/1995, Title = {Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning and Uncertainty, European Conference, ECSQARU'95, Fribourg, Switzerland, July 3-5, 1995, Proceedings}, Year = {1995}, Editor = {Christine Froidevaux and J{\"u}rg Kohlas}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {946}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {ECSQARU}, ISBN = {3-540-60112-0} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/esaw/2004, Title = {Engineering Societies in the Agents World V, 5th InternationalWorkshop, ESAW 2004, Toulouse, France, October 20-22, 2004, Revised Selected and Invited Papers}, Year = {2005}, Editor = {Marie Pierre Gleizes and Andrea Omicini and Franco Zambonelli}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {3451}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {ESAW}, ISBN = {3-540-27330-1} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/ecsqaru/2005, Title = {Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty, 8th European Conference, ECSQARU 2005, Barcelona, Spain, July 6-8, 2005, Proceedings}, Year = {2005}, Editor = {Lluis Godo}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {3571}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {ECSQARU}, ISBN = {3-540-27326-3} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/ijcai/2003, Title = {IJCAI-03, Proceedings of the Eighteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Acapulco, Mexico, August 9-15, 2003}, Year = {2003}, Editor = {Georg Gottlob and Toby Walsh}, Publisher = {Morgan Kaufmann}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {IJCIA} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/deon/2010, Title = {Deontic Logic in Computer Science, 10th International Conference, DEON 2010, Fi esole, Italy, July 7-9, 2010. Proceedings}, Year = {2010}, Editor = {Guido Governatori and Giovanni Sartor}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {6181}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {DEON}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-14183-6}, ISBN = {978-3-642-14182-9} } @Proceedings{Governatori2010, Title = {Deontic Logic in Computer Science, 10th International Conference, DEON 2010, Fiesole, Italy, July 7-9, 2010. Proceedings}, Year = {2010}, Editor = {Guido Governatori and Giovanni Sartor}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {6181}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {DEON}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-14183-6}, ISBN = {978-3-642-14182-9} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/ecsi/2014, Title = {Proceedings of the European Conference on Social Intelligence (ECSI-2014), Barcelona, Spain, November 3-5, 2014}, Year = {2014}, Editor = {Andreas Herzig and Emiliano Lorini}, Publisher = {CEUR-WS.org}, Series = {{CEUR} Workshop Proceedings}, Volume = {1283}, Bibsource = {dblp computer science bibliography, http://dblp.org}, Biburl = {http://dblp.uni-trier.de/rec/bib/conf/ecsi/2014}, Timestamp = {Thu, 20 Nov 2014 19:52:02 +0100}, Url = {http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1283} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/atal/2012, Title = {International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, AAMAS 2012, Valencia, Spain, June 4-8, 2012 (3 Volumes)}, Year = {2012}, Editor = {Wiebe van der Hoek and Lin Padgham and Vincent Conitzer and Michael Winikoff}, Publisher = {IFAAMAS}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {AAMAS}, Ee = {http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2343576} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/ecsqaru/1999, Title = {Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning and Uncertainty, European Conference, ECSQARU'99, London, UK, July 5-9, 1999, Proceedings}, Year = {1999}, Editor = {Anthony Hunter and Simon Parsons}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {1638}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {ECSQARU}, ISBN = {3-540-66131-X} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/ACMicec/2004, Title = {Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Electronic Commerce, ICEC 2004, Delft, The Netherlands, October 25-27, 2004}, Year = {2004}, Editor = {Marijn Janssen and Henk G. Sol and Ren{\'e} W. Wagenaar}, Publisher = {ACM}, Series = {ACM International Conference Proceeding Series}, Volume = {60}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {ICEC}, ISBN = {1-58113-930-6} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/ijcai/2005, Title = {IJCAI-05, Proceedings of the Nineteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK, July 30-August 5, 2005}, Year = {2005}, Editor = {Leslie Pack Kaelbling and Alessandro Saffiotti}, Publisher = {Professional Book Center}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {IJCAI}, ISBN = {0938075934} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/uai/1999, Title = {UAI '99: Proceedings of the Fifteenth Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, Stockholm, Sweden, July 30-August 1, 1999}, Year = {1999}, Editor = {Kathryn B. Laskey and Henri Prade}, Publisher = {Morgan Kaufmann}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {UAI} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/clima/2004V, Title = {Computational Logic in Multi-Agent Systems, 5th International Workshop, CLIMA V, Lisbon, Portugal, September 29-30, 2004, Revised Selected and Invited Papers}, Year = {2005}, Editor = {Jo{\~a}o Alexandre Leite and Paolo Torroni}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {3487}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {CLIMA V}, ISBN = {3-540-28060-X} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/dbsec/2011, Title = {Data and Applications Security and Privacy XXV - 25th Annual IFIP WG 11.3 Conference, DBSec 2011, Richmond, VA, USA, July 11-13, 2011. Proceedings}, Year = {2011}, Editor = {Yingjiu Li}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {6818}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {DBSec}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22348-8}, ISBN = {978-3-642-22347-1} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/kr/2010, Title = {Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proceedings of the Twelfth International Conference, KR 2010, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, May 9-13, 2010}, Year = {2010}, Editor = {Fangzhen Lin and Ulrike Sattler and Miroslaw Truszczynski}, Publisher = {AAAI Press}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {KR} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/rasta/2002, Title = {Regulated Agent-Based Social Systems, First International Workshop, RASTA 2002, Bologna, Italy, July 16, 2002, Revised Selected and Invited Papers}, Year = {2004}, Editor = {Gabriela Lindemann and Daniel Moldt and Mario Paolucci}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {2934}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {RASTA}, ISBN = {3-540-20923-9} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/ecsqaru/2011, Title = {Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty - 11th European Conference, ECSQARU 2011, Belfast, UK, June 29-July 1, 2011. Proceedings}, Year = {2011}, Editor = {Weiru Liu}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {6717}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {ECSQARU}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22152-1}, ISBN = {978-3-642-22151-4} } @Proceedings{Liu2011, Title = {Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty - 11th European Conference, ECSQARU 2011, Belfast, UK, June 29-July 1, 2011. Proceedings}, Year = {2011}, Editor = {Weiru Liu}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {6717}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {ECSQARU}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22152-1}, ISBN = {978-3-642-22151-4} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/deon/2004, Title = {Deontic Logic in Computer Science, 7th International Workshop on Deontic Logic in Computer Science, DEON 2004, Madeira, Portugal, May 26-28, 2004. Proceedings}, Year = {2004}, Editor = {Alessio Lomuscio and Donald Nute}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {3065}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {DEON}, ISBN = {3-540-22111-5} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/ecai/2004, Title = {Proceedings of the 16th Eureopean Conference on Artificial Intelligence, ECAI'2004, including Prestigious Applicants of Intelligent Systems, PAIS 2004, Valencia, Spain, August 22-27, 2004}, Year = {2004}, Editor = {Ramon L{\'o}pez de M{\'a}ntaras and Lorenza Saitta}, Publisher = {IOS Press}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {ECAI}, ISBN = {1-58603-452-9} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/aose/2005, Title = {Agent-Oriented Software Engineering VI, 6th International Workshop, AOSE 2005, Utrecht, The Netherlands, July 25, 2005. Revised and Invited Papers}, Year = {2006}, Editor = {J{\"o}rg P. M{\"u}ller and Franco Zambonelli}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {3950}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {AOSE}, ISBN = {3-540-34097-1} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/isola/2004i, Title = {International Symposium on Leveraging Applications of Formal Methods, ISoLA 2004, October 30 - November 2, 2004, Paphos, Cyprus. Preliminary proceedings}, Year = {2004}, Editor = {Tiziana Margaria and Bernhard Steffen and Anna Philippou and Manfred Reitenspie{\ss}}, Publisher = {Department of Computer Science, University of Cyprus}, Series = {Technical Report}, Volume = {TR-2004-6}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {ISoLA (Preliminary proceedings)} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/argmas/2009, Title = {Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems, 6th International Workshop, ArgMAS 2009, Budapest, Hungary, May 12, 2009. Revised Selected and Invited Papers}, Year = {2010}, Editor = {Peter McBurney and Iyad Rahwan and Simon Parsons and Nicolas Maudet}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {6057}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {ArgMAS}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-12805-9}, ISBN = {978-3-642-12804-2} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/modelage/1997, Title = {Formal Models of Agents, ESPRIT Project ModelAge Final Workshop, Selected Papers}, Year = {1999}, Editor = {John-Jules Ch. Meyer and Pierre-Yves Schobbens}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {1760}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {ModelAge Workshop}, ISBN = {3-540-67027-0} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/tafa/2011, Title = {Theorie and Applications of Formal Argumentation - First International Workshop, TAFA 2011. Barcelona, Spain, July 16-17, 2011, Revised Selected Papers}, Year = {2012}, Editor = {Sanjay Modgil and Nir Oren and Francesca Toni}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {7132}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {TAFA}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29184-5}, ISBN = {978-3-642-29183-8} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/atal/2006, Title = {5th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2006), Hakodate, Japan, May 8-12, 2006}, Year = {2006}, Editor = {Hideyuki Nakashima and Michael P. Wellman and Gerhard Weiss and Peter Stone}, Publisher = {ACM}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {AAMAS}, ISBN = {1-59593-303-4} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/kesamsta/2011, Title = {Agent and Multi-Agent Systems: Technologies and Applications - 5th KES International Conference, KES-AMSTA 2011, Manchester, UK, June 29 - July 1, 2011. Proceedings}, Year = {2011}, Editor = {James O'Shea and Ngoc Thanh Nguyen and Keeley A. Crockett and Robert J. Howlett and Lakhmi C. Jain}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {6682}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {KES-AMSTA}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22000-5}, ISBN = {978-3-642-21999-3} } @Proceedings{OShea2011, Title = {Agent and Multi-Agent Systems: Technologies and Applications - 5th KES International Conference, KES-AMSTA 2011, Manchester, UK, June 29 - July 1, 2011. Proceedings}, Year = {2011}, Editor = {James O'Shea and Ngoc Thanh Nguyen and Keeley A. Crockett and Robert J. Howlett and Lakhmi C. Jain}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {6682}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {KES-AMSTA}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22000-5}, ISBN = {978-3-642-21999-3} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/atal/2009coin, Title = {Coordination, Organizations, Institutions and Norms in Agent Systems V, COIN 2009 International Workshops. COIN@AAMAS 2009, Budapest, Hungary, May 2009, COIN@IJCAI 2009, Pasadena, USA, July 2009, COIN@MALLOW 2009, Turin, Italy, September 2009. Revised Selected Papers}, Year = {2010}, Editor = {Julian A. Padget and Alexander Artikis and Wamberto Weber Vasconcelos and Kostas Stathis and Viviane Torres da Silva and Eric T. Matson and Axel Polleres}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {6069}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {COIN@AAMAS{\&}IJCAI{\&}MALLOW}, Ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-14962-7}, ISBN = {978-3-642-14961.0} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/atal/2008-1, Title = {7th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2008), Estoril, Portugal, May 12-16, 2008, Volume 1}, Year = {2008}, Editor = {Lin Padgham and David C. Parkes and J{\"o}rg P. M{\"u}ller and Simon Parsons}, Publisher = {IFAAMAS}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {AAMAS (1)}, ISBN = {978-0-9817381-0-9} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/woa/2006, Title = {Proceedings of the 7th WOA 2006 Workshop, From Objects to Agents (Dagli Oggetti Agli Agenti), Catania, Italy, September 26-27, 2006}, Year = {2006}, Editor = {Flavio De Paoli and Antonella Di Stefano and Andrea Omicini and Corrado Santoro}, Publisher = {CEUR-WS.org}, Series = {CEUR Workshop Proceedings}, Volume = {204}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {WOA} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/comma/2014, Title = {Computational Models of Argument - Proceedings of {COMMA} 2014, Atholl Palace Hotel, Scottish Highlands, UK, September 9-12, 2014}, Year = {2014}, Editor = {Simon Parsons and Nir Oren and Chris Reed and Federico Cerutti}, Publisher = {{IOS} Press}, Series = {Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications}, Volume = {266}, Bibsource = {dblp computer science bibliography, http://dblp.org}, Biburl = {http://dblp.uni-trier.de/rec/bib/conf/comma/2014}, ISBN = {978-1-61499-435-0}, Timestamp = {Thu, 25 Sep 2014 12:39:05 +0200} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/comma/2014, Title = {Computational Models of Argument - Proceedings of {COMMA} 2014, Atholl Palace Hotel, Scottish Highlands, UK, September 9-12, 2014}, Year = {2014}, Editor = {Simon Parsons and Nir Oren and Chris Reed and Federico Cerutti}, Publisher = {{IOS} Press}, Series = {Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications}, Volume = {266}, Bibsource = {dblp computer science bibliography, http://dblp.org}, Biburl = {http://dblp.uni-trier.de/rec/bib/conf/comma/2014}, ISBN = {978-1-61499-435-0}, Timestamp = {Thu, 25 Sep 2014 12:39:05 +0200} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/ecai/2012, Title = {ECAI 2012 - 20th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence. Including Prestigious Applications of Artificial Intelligence (PAIS-2012) System Demonstrations Track, Montpellier, France, August 27-31 , 2012}, Year = {2012}, Editor = {Luc De Raedt and Christian Bessi{\`e}re and Didier Dubois and Patrick Doherty and Paolo Frasconi and Fredrik Heintz and Peter J. F. Lucas}, Publisher = {IOS Press}, Series = {Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications}, Volume = {242}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {ECAI}, Ee = {http://www.booksonline.iospress.nl/Content/View.aspx?piid=31572}, ISBN = {978-1-61499-097-0} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/ecai/2014, Title = {{ECAI} 2014 - 21st European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 18-22 August 2014, Prague, Czech Republic - Including Prestigious Applications of Intelligent Systems {(PAIS} 2014)}, Year = {2014}, Editor = {Torsten Schaub and Gerhard Friedrich and Barry O'Sullivan}, Publisher = {{IOS} Press}, Series = {Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications}, Volume = {263}, Bibsource = {dblp computer science bibliography, http://dblp.org}, Biburl = {http://dblp.uni-trier.de/rec/bib/conf/ecai/2014}, ISBN = {978-1-61499-418-3}, Timestamp = {Thu, 11 Sep 2014 15:40:47 +0200} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/eurasiaict/2002, Title = {EurAsia-ICT 2002: Information and Communication Technology, First EurAsian Conference, Shiraz, Iran, October 29-31, 2002, Proceedings}, Year = {2002}, Editor = {Hassan Shafazand and A. Min Tjoa}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {2510}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {EurAsia-ICT}, ISBN = {3-540-00028-3} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/atal/2009-2, Title = {8th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2009), Budapest, Hungary, May 10-15, 2009, Volume 2}, Year = {2009}, Editor = {Carles Sierra and Cristiano Castelfranchi and Keith S. Decker and Jaime Sim{\~a}o Sichman}, Publisher = {IFAAMAS}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {AAMAS (2)}, ISBN = {978-0-9817381-7-8} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/webi/2005, Title = {2005 IEEE / WIC / ACM International Conference on Web Intelligence (WI 2005), 19-22 September 2005, Compiegne, France}, Year = {2005}, Editor = {Andrzej Skowron and Rakesh Agrawal and Michael Luck and Takahira Yamaguchi and Pierre Morizet-Mahoudeaux and Jiming Liu and Ning Zhong}, Publisher = {IEEE Computer Society}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {Web Intelligence}, ISBN = {0-7695-2415-X} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/iat/2005, Title = {Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Intelligent Agent Technology, Compiegne, France, September 19-22, 2005}, Year = {2005}, Editor = {Andrzej Skowron and Jean-Paul A. Barth{\`e}s and Lakhmi C. Jain and Ron Sun and Pierre Morizet-Mahoudeaux and Jiming Liu and Ning Zhong}, Publisher = {IEEE Computer Society}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {IAT}, ISBN = {0-7695-2416-8} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/atal/2011, Title = {10th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2011), Taipei, Taiwan, May 2-6, 2011, Volume 1-3}, Year = {2011}, Editor = {Liz Sonenberg and Peter Stone and Kagan Tumer and Pinar Yolum}, Publisher = {IFAAMAS}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {AAMAS}, ISBN = {978-0-9826571-5-7} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/lpar/2005, Title = {Logic for Programming, Artificial Intelligence, and Reasoning, 12th International Conference, LPAR 2005, Montego Bay, Jamaica, December 2-6, 2005, Proceedings}, Year = {2005}, Editor = {Geoff Sutcliffe and Andrei Voronkov}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {3835}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {LPAR}, ISBN = {3-540-30553-X} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/clima/2005, Title = {Computational Logic in Multi-Agent Systems, 6th International Workshop, CLIMA VI, London, UK, June 27-29, 2005, Revised Selected and Invited Papers}, Year = {2006}, Editor = {Francesca Toni and Paolo Torroni}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {3900}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {CLIMA VI}, ISBN = {3-540-33996-5} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/aiia/1993, Title = {Advances in Artificial Intelligence, Third Congress of the Italian Association for Artificial Intelligence, AI*IA'93, Torino, Italy, October 26-28, 1993, Proceedings}, Year = {1993}, Editor = {Pietro Torasso}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {728}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {AI*IA}, ISBN = {3-540-57292-9} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/bnaic/2005, Title = {BNAIC 2005 - Proceedings of the Seventeenth Belgium-Netherlands Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Brussels, Belgium, October 17-18, 2005}, Year = {2005}, Editor = {Katja Verbeeck and Karl Tuyls and Ann Now{\'e} and Bernard Manderick and Bart Kuijpers}, Publisher = {Koninklijke Vlaamse Academie van Belie voor Wetenschappen en Kunsten}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {BNAIC} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/comma/2012, Title = {Computational Models of Argument - Proceedings of COMMA 2012, Vienna, Austria, September 10-12, 2012}, Year = {2012}, Editor = {Bart Verheij and Stefan Szeider and Stefan Woltran}, Publisher = {IOS Press}, Series = {Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications}, Volume = {245}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {COMMA}, Ee = {http://www.booksonline.iospress.nl/Content/View.aspx?piid=32171}, ISBN = {978-1-61499-110-6} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/ijcai/2011, Title = {IJCAI 2011, Proceedings of the 22nd International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain, July 16-22, 2011}, Year = {2011}, Editor = {Toby Walsh}, Publisher = {IJCAI/AAAI}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {IJCAI}, ISBN = {978-1-57735-516-8} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/er/2014, Title = {Conceptual Modeling - 33rd International Conference, {ER} 2014, Atlanta, GA, USA, October 27-29, 2014. Proceedings}, Year = {2014}, Editor = {Eric S. K. Yu and Gillian Dobbie and Matthias Jarke and Sandeep Purao}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {8824}, Bibsource = {dblp computer science bibliography, http://dblp.org}, Biburl = {http://dblp.uni-trier.de/rec/bib/conf/er/2014}, Doi = {10.1007/978-3-319-12206-9}, ISBN = {978-3-319-12205-2}, Timestamp = {Mon, 13 Oct 2014 12:52:10 +0200}, Url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12206-9} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/iri/2005, Title = {Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE International Conference on Information Reuse and Integration, IRI - 2005, August 15-17, 2005, Las Vegas Hilton, Las Vegas, NV, USA}, Year = {2005}, Editor = {Du Zhang and Taghi M. Khoshgoftaar and Mei-Ling Shyu}, Publisher = {IEEE Systems, Man, and Cybernetics Society}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {IRI}, ISBN = {0-7803-9093-8} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/ausai/2005, Title = {AI 2005: Advances in Artificial Intelligence, 18th Australian Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Sydney, Australia, December 5-9, 2005, Proceedings}, Year = {2005}, Editor = {Shichao Zhang and Ray Jarvis}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {3809}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {Australian Conference on Artificial Intelligence}, ISBN = {3-540-30462-2} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/ismis/2003, Title = {Foundations of Intelligent Systems, 14th International Symposium, ISMIS 2003, Maebashi City, Japan, October 28-31, 2003, Proceedings}, Year = {2003}, Editor = {Ning Zhong and Zbigniew W. Ras and Shusaku Tsumoto and Einoshin Suzuki}, Publisher = {Springer}, Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, Volume = {2871}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {ISMIS}, ISBN = {3-540-20256-0} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/iat/2009, Title = {Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Intelligent Agent Technology, IAT 2009, Milan, Italy, 15-18 September 2009}, Year = {2009}, Publisher = {IEEE}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {IAT} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/hicss/2005, Title = {38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-38 2005), CD-ROM / Abstracts Proceedings, 3-6 January 2005, Big Island, HI, USA}, Year = {2005}, Publisher = {IEEE Computer Society}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {HICSS}, ISBN = {0-7695-2268-8} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/icail/2005, Title = {The Tenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, Proceedings of the Conference, June 6-11, 2005, Bologna, Italy}, Year = {2005}, Publisher = {ACM}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {ICAIL}, ISBN = {1-59593-081-7} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/normas/2005, Title = {Symposium on Normative Multi-Agent Systems, NORMAS 2005, part of the SSAISB 2005 Convention, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, UK, 12-15 April 2005. Proceedings}, Year = {2005}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {NORMAS} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/atal/2004, Title = {3rd International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2004), 19-23 August 2004, New York, NY, USA}, Year = {2004}, Publisher = {IEEE Computer Society}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {AAMAS}, ISBN = {1-58113-864-4} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/edoc/2004, Title = {8th International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference (EDOC 2004), 20-24 September 2004, Monterey, California, USA, Proceedings}, Year = {2004}, Publisher = {IEEE Computer Society}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {EDOC}, ISBN = {0-7695-2214-9} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/iat/2004, Title = {2004 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Intelligent Agent Technology (IAT 2004), 20-24 September 2004, Beijing, China}, Year = {2004}, Publisher = {IEEE Computer Society}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {IAT}, ISBN = {0-7695-2101-0} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/webi/2004, Title = {2004 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Web Intelligence (WI 2004), 20-24 September 2004, Beijing, China}, Year = {2004}, Publisher = {IEEE Computer Society}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {Web Intelligence}, ISBN = {0-7695-2100-2} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/atal/2003, Title = {The Second International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents {\&} Multiagent Systems, AAMAS 2003, July 14-18, 2003, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, Proceedings}, Year = {2003}, Publisher = {ACM}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {AAMAS}, ISBN = {1-58113-683-8} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/edoc/2003, Title = {7th International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference (EDOC 2003), 16-19 September 2003, Brisbane, Australia, Proceedings}, Year = {2003}, Publisher = {IEEE Computer Society}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {EDOC}, ISBN = {0-7695-1994-6} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/iat/2003, Title = {2003 IEEE/WIC International Conference on Intelligent Agent Technology (IAT 2003), 13-17 October 2003, Halifax, Canada}, Year = {2003}, Publisher = {IEEE Computer Society}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {IAT}, ISBN = {0-7695-1931-8} } @Proceedings{DBLP:conf/webi/2003, Title = {2003 IEEE / WIC International Conference on Web Intelligence, (WI 2003), 13-17 October 2003, Halifax, Canada}, Year = {2003}, Publisher = {IEEE Computer Society}, Bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}, Booktitle = {Web Intelligence}, ISBN = {0-7695-1932-6} }