Aldo Iván Ramírez Abarca & Jan Broersen (2019):
A Logic of Objective and Subjective Oughts.
In: European Conference on Logics in Artificial Intelligence.
Springer,
pp. 629–641,
doi:10.1007/978-3-030-19570-0_41.
Aldo Iván Ramírez Abarca & Jan Broersen (2019):
Stit Semantics for Epistemic Notions Based on Information Disclosure in Interactive Settings.
In: International Workshop on Dynamic Logic.
Springer,
pp. 171–189,
doi:10.1007/978-3-030-38808-9_11.
Konstantine Arkoudas, Selmer Bringsjord & Paul Bello (2005):
Toward ethical robots via mechanized deontic logic.
In: AAAI Fall Symposium on Machine Ethics,
pp. 17–23.
Alexandru Baltag & Sonja Smets (2006):
Conditional doxastic models: A qualitative approach to dynamic belief revision.
Electronic notes in theoretical computer science 165,
pp. 5–21,
doi:10.1016/j.entcs.2006.05.034.
Alexandru Baltag & Sonja Smets (2006):
The logic of conditional doxastic actions: a theory of dynamic multi-agent belief revision.
In: Proceedings of ESSLLI Workshop on Rationality and Knowledge,
pp. 13–30.
Alexandru Baltag & Sonja Smets (2008):
Probabilistic dynamic belief revision.
Synthese 165(2),
pp. 179,
doi:10.1007/s11229-008-9369-8.
N. Belnap, M. Perloff & M. Xu (2001):
Facing the future: agents and choices in our indeterminist world.
Oxford University Press.
Adam Bjorndahl, Joseph Y Halpern & Rafael Pass (2017):
Reasoning about rationality.
Games and Economic Behavior 104,
pp. 146–164,
doi:10.1016/j.geb.2017.03.006.
Oliver Board (2004):
Dynamic interactive epistemology.
Games and Economic Behavior 49(1),
pp. 49–80,
doi:10.1016/j.geb.2003.10.006.
Craig Boutilier (1995):
On the revision of probabilistic belief states.
Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 36(1),
pp. 158–183,
doi:10.1305/ndjfl/1040308833.
Selmer Bringsjord, Konstantine Arkoudas & Paul Bello (2006):
Toward a general logicist methodology for engineering ethically correct robots.
IEEE Intelligent Systems 21(4),
pp. 38–44,
doi:10.1109/MIS.2006.82.
Jan Broersen (2013):
Probabilistic stit logic and its decomposition.
International journal of approximate reasoning 54(4),
pp. 467–477,
doi:10.1016/j.ijar.2012.08.007.
Jan Broersen & Aldo Iván Ramírez Abarca (2018):
Formalising Oughts and Practical Knowledge without Resorting to Action Types.
In: Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems.
International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems,
pp. 1877–1879.
Bruno De Finetti (1936):
Les probabilités nulles.
Gauthier-Villars.
HWA Duijf (2018):
Let's do it!: Collective responsibility, joint action, and participation.
Utrecht University.
Konstantinos Gkikas (2015):
Stable Beliefs and Conditional Probability Spaces.
Universiteit van Amsterdam.
Joseph Y Halpern (2010):
Lexicographic probability, conditional probability, and nonstandard probability.
Games and Economic Behavior 68(1),
pp. 155–179,
doi:10.1016/j.geb.2009.03.013.
Peter J Hammond (1994):
Elementary non-Archimedean representations of probability for decision theory and games.
In: Patrick Suppes: scientific philosopher.
Springer,
pp. 25–61,
doi:10.1007/978-94-011-0774-7_2.
John C Harsanyi (1967):
Games with incomplete information played by Bayesianplayers, I–III Part I. The basic model.
Management science 14(3),
pp. 159–182,
doi:10.1287/mnsc.14.3.159.
John Horty (2019):
Epistemic Oughts in Stit Semantics.
Ergo, an Open Access Journal of Philosophy 6,
doi:10.3998/ergo.12405314.0006.004.
John Horty & Eric Pacuit (2017):
Action types in stit semantics.
The Review of Symbolic Logic 10(4),
pp. 617–637,
doi:10.1017/S1755020317000016.
Richard C Jeffrey (1965):
Ethics and the Logic of Decision.
The Journal of Philosophy 62(19),
pp. 528–539,
doi:10.2307/2023748.
Edi Karni (2014):
Axiomatic foundations of expected utility and subjective probability.
In: Handbook of the Economics of Risk and Uncertainty 1.
Elsevier,
pp. 1–39,
doi:10.1016/B978-0-444-53685-3.00001-5.
Daniel Lehmann & Menachem Magidor (1992):
What does a conditional knowledge base entail?.
Artificial intelligence 55(1),
pp. 1–60,
doi:10.1016/0004-3702(92)90041-U.
Emiliano Lorini, Dominique Longin & Eunate Mayor (2014):
A logical analysis of responsibility attribution: emotions, individuals and collectives.
Journal of Logic and Computation 24(6),
pp. 1313–1339,
doi:10.1093/logcom/ext072.
Eric Pacuit & Olivier Roy (2017):
Epistemic Foundations of Game Theory.
In: Edward N. Zalta: The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy,
Summer 2017 edition.
Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University.
Martin Peterson (2017):
An introduction to decision theory.
Cambridge University Press,
doi:10.1017/9781316585061.
Karl Raimund Popper (1968):
The Logic of Scientific Discovery.(Revised Edition.)..
Hutchinson.
Alfréd Rényi (1955):
On a new axiomatic theory of probability.
Acta Mathematica Academiae Scientiarum Hungarica 6(3-4),
pp. 285–335,
doi:10.1007/BF02024393.
Abraham Robinson (1973):
Function theory on some nonarchimedean fields.
The American Mathematical Monthly 80(6),
pp. 87–109,
doi:10.2307/3038223.
L.J. Savage (1954):
The Foundations of Statistics.
John Wiley and Sons,
New York.
Keiran Sharpe (2018):
On risk and uncertainty, and objective versus subjective probability.
Economic Record 94,
pp. 49–72,
doi:10.1111/1475-4932.12403.
Katie Steele & H. Orri Stefánsson (2016):
Decision Theory.
In: Edward N. Zalta: The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy,
winter 2016 edition.
Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University.
Allard Tamminga (2013):
Deontic logic for strategic games.
Erkenntnis 78(1),
pp. 183–200,
doi:10.1007/s10670-011-9349-0.
Bas C Van Fraassen (1995):
Fine-grained opinion, probability, and the logic of full belief.
Journal of Philosophical logic 24(4),
pp. 349–377,
doi:10.1007/BF01048352.
Heinrich Wansing (2006):
Doxastic decisions, epistemic justification, and the logic of agency.
Philosophical Studies 128(1),
pp. 201–227,
doi:10.1007/s11098-005-4063-x.
Ming Xu (1994):
Decidability of deliberative stit theories with multiple agents.
In: International Conference on Temporal Logic.
Springer,
pp. 332–348,
doi:10.1007/BFb0013997.
Ming Xu (2015):
Combinations of Stit with Ought and Know.
Journal of Philosophical Logic 44(6),
pp. 851–877,
doi:10.1007/s10992-015-9365-7.