Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

The Role of Diagnosis and Decision Theory in Normative Reasoning

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Formal Models of Agents (ModelAge 1997)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 1760))

Included in the following conference series:

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. C.E. Alchourrón, P. Gärdenfors, and D. Makinson. On the logic of theory change: partial meet contraction and revision functions. Journal of Symbolic Logic, pages 510–530, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  2. A.R. Anderson. A reduction of deontic logic to alethic modal logic. Mind, 67:100–103, 1958.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. H. Beatty. On evaluating deontic logics. In Exact philosophy, pages 173–178. Reidel, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  4. R.W.H. Bons, R.M. Lee, R.W. Wagenaar, and C.D. Wrigley. Modeling interorganizational trade procedures using documentary Petri nets. In Proceedings of the 27thHawaii International Conferenceon System Sciences (HICSS’95), Hawaii, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  5. C. Boutilier. Toward a logic for qualitative decision theory. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR’94), pages 75–86, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  6. H. Castañeda. The paradoxes of deontic logic: the simplest solution to all of them in one fell swoop. In New Studies in Deontic Logic. D. Reidel, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  7. B.F. Chellas. Modal Logic: An Introduction. Cambridge University Press, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  8. K.-T. Chen and R.M. Lee. Schematic evaluation of internal accounting control systems. Technical Report Research Monograph RM-1992-08-01, Euridis, Erasmus University Rotterdam, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  9. J. de Kleer, A.K. Mackwort, and R. Reiter. Characterizing diagnosis. In Proceedings AAAI’90, pages 324–330, Boston, MA, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  10. D. Dubois and H. Prade. Qualitative decision theory. In Proceedings IJCAI’95, pages 1924–1930. Morgan Kaufmann, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  11. R Davis and H. Walter. Model based reasoning: troubleshouting. In Exploring Artificial Intelligence: Survey talks from the National Conferences on Artificial Intelligence, pages 297–346, San Mateo, California, 1988. Morgan Kaufmann.

    Google Scholar 

  12. B. Hansson. An analysis of some deontic logics. In Deontic Logic: Introductionary and Systematic Readings, pages 121–147. D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, Holland, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  13. J.F. Horty. Deontic logic as founded in nonmonotonic logic. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, 9:69–91, 1993.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. R.E. Jennings. Can there be a natural logic? Synthese, 65:257–274, 1985.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  15. A.J.I. Jones and M. Sergot. Deontic logic in the representation of law: Towards a methodology. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 1:45–64, 1992.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. H. Katsuno and A.O. Mendelzon. On the difference between updating a belief base and revising it. In P. Gärdenfors, editor, Belief Revision, pages 183–203. Cambridge University Press, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  17. J. Lang. Conditional desires and utilities-an alternative approach to qualitative decision theory. In Proceedings of the ECAI’96, pages 318–322, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  18. R. Reiter. A theory of diagnosis from first principles. Artificial Intelligence, 32:57–95, 1987.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  19. P. Ramos and J.L. Fiadeiro. A deontic logic for diagnosis of organisational process design. Technical report, Department of Informatics, Faculty of Sciences — University of Lisbon, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  20. P. Ramos and J.L. Fiadeiro. Diagnosis in organisational process design. Technical report, Department of Informatics, Faculty of Sciences — University of Lisbon, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  21. A. Ross. Imperatives and logic. Theoria, 7:53–71, 1941.

    Google Scholar 

  22. J.-F. Raskin, Y.-H. Tan, and L.W.N. van der Torre. How to model normative behavior in Petri nets. In Proceedings of the Modelage’96, Sesimbra, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  23. R. Thomason and R. Horty. Nondeterministic action and dominance: foundations for planning and qualitative decision. In Proceedings of the Sixth Conference on Theoretical Aspects of Rationality and Knowledge (TARK’96), pages 229–250. Morgan Kaufmann, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  24. R. Thomason. Deontic logic as founded on tense logic. In R. Hilpinen, editor, New Studies in Deontic Logic, pages 165–176. D. Reidel, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Y.-H. Tan and L.W.N. van der Torre. DIODE: Deontic logic based on diagnosis from first principles. In Proceedings of the Workshop ‘Artificial normative reasoning’ of the Eleventh European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI’94), Amsterdam, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Y.-H. Tan and L.W.N. van der Torre. Representing deontic reasoning in a diagnostic framework. In Proceedings of the Workshopon Legal Applications of Logic Programming of the Eleventh International Conference on Logic Programming (ICLP’94), Genoa, Italy, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Y.-H. Tan and L.W.N. van der Torre. How to combine ordering and minimizing in a deontic logic based on preferences. InDeontic Logic, Agency and Normative Systems. Proceedings of theΔeon’96.Workshopsin Computing, pages 216–232. Springer Verlag, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  28. L.W.N. van der Torre. Violated obligations in a defeasible deontic logic. In Proceedings of the Eleventh European Conferenceon Artificial Intelligence (ECAI’94), pages 371–375. JohnWiley & Sons, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  29. L.W.N. van der Torre and Y.H. Tan. Cancelling and overshadowing: two types of defeasibility in defeasible deontic logic. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI’95). Morgan Kaufman, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  30. L.W.N. van der Torre and Y.H. Tan. The many faces of defeasibility in defeasible deontic logic. In D. Nute, editor, Defeasible Deontic Logic. Kluwer, 1997. To appear.

    Google Scholar 

  31. L.W.N. van der Torre and Y.H. Tan. Prohairetic deontic logic (PDL). In Proceedings of AAAI spring symposium on qualitative preferences in deliberation and practical reasoning, 1997. To appear.

    Google Scholar 

  32. B.C. van Fraassen. Values and the heart command. Journal of Philosophy, 70:5–19, 1973.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. G.H. von Wright. Deontic logic and the theory of conditions. In Deontic Logic: Introductory and Systematic Readings, pages 159–177. D. Reidel, Dordrecht, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  34. G.H. von Wright. On the logic of norms and actions. In New Studies ofDeontic Logic. D.Reidel, Dordrecht, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Max-Planck-Institute for Computer Science, Im StadWald, D-66123, Saarbrücken, Germany

    Leendert W. N. van der Torre

  2. Department of Informatics, ISCTE, Av. das Forcas Armadas Edificío ISCTE, 1600, Lisboa

    Pedro Ramos

  3. Department of Informatics, Faculty of Sciences, University of Lisbon, Campo Grande, 1700, Lisboa

    José Luiz Fiadeiro

  4. EURIDIS, Erasmus University Rotterdam, P.O. Box 1738, 3000 DR, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

    Yao-Hua Tan

Authors
  1. Leendert W. N. van der Torre
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Pedro Ramos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. José Luiz Fiadeiro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yao-Hua Tan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science, Utrecht University, Padualaan 14, De Uithof, 3508 TB, Utrecht, The Netherlands

    John-Jules Ch. Meyer

  2. Institut d’Informatique, Rue Grandgagnage 21, 5000, Namur, Belgium

    Pierre-Yves Schobbens

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1999 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

van der Torre, L.W.N., Ramos, P., Fiadeiro, J.L., Tan, YH. (1999). The Role of Diagnosis and Decision Theory in Normative Reasoning. In: Meyer, JJ.C., Schobbens, PY. (eds) Formal Models of Agents. ModelAge 1997. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 1760. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-46581-2_15

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-46581-2_15

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-67027-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-46581-2

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics