Agency and Deontic Logic

By J. Horty. 2001

540 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b66efc6c9184ebe39f5200742c5c0aab48d3d8dd

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

1. Travis D. Breaux
2. Fabrizio Cariani
3. Annie I. Antón
4. J. Benthem

Citations in the corpus

• Deliberative modality under epistemic uncertainty (2013, background): “The possibility for the former to leave out a non-empty set of worlds at which no action is taken is reminiscent of the residual answer in the latter (Hamblin 1958).”
• Analyzing Regulatory Rules for Privacy and Security Requirements (2008, unknown): “Rights and obligations are similar to the notions of “what is permis-sible” and “what ought to be,” as modeled by Deontic Logic [29].”
• Priority Structures in Deontic Logic (2014, background): “[14, 45] on temporal ‘protocols’, and [23] on deontic STIT logic.”
• Machine Ethics: Creating an Ethical Intelligent Agent (2007, unknown): “In this context , John Horty (2001) proposes an extension of deontic logic, incorporating a formal theory of agency that describes what agents ought to do under various conditions over extended periods of time.”
• Towards Regulatory Compliance: Extracting Rights and Obligations to Align Requirements with Regulations (2006, background): “Horty has shown that Deontic logic and reasoning must distinguish between what an agent “ought to do” and “ought to be” [15, 16].”
• Moral Decision Making in Autonomous Systems: Enforcement, Moral Emotions, Dignity, Trust, and Deception (2012, background): “logic, as the actions required or forbidden are relatively clearly articulated within the LOW and the ROE, as opposed to deontic logic [28], which would be more suitable for deeper reasoning in domains such as healthcare or more intimate HRI.”