Semantic games for first-order entailment with algorithmic players
(2014) The Eleventh Conference on Logic and the Foundations of Game and Decision Theory- Abstract
- If semantic consequence is analyzed with extensive games, logical reasoning can be accounted for by looking at how players solve entailment games. However, earlier approaches to game semantics cannot achieve this reduction, by want of explicitly dened preferences for players. Moreover, although entailment games
can naturally translate the idea of argumentation about a common ground, a cognitive interpretation is undermined by the complexity of strategic reasoning. We thus describe a class of semantic extensive entailment game with algorithmic players, who have preferences for parsimonious spending of computational resources and thus compute partial strategies under qualitative uncertainty about future histories. We prove the... (More) - If semantic consequence is analyzed with extensive games, logical reasoning can be accounted for by looking at how players solve entailment games. However, earlier approaches to game semantics cannot achieve this reduction, by want of explicitly dened preferences for players. Moreover, although entailment games
can naturally translate the idea of argumentation about a common ground, a cognitive interpretation is undermined by the complexity of strategic reasoning. We thus describe a class of semantic extensive entailment game with algorithmic players, who have preferences for parsimonious spending of computational resources and thus compute partial strategies under qualitative uncertainty about future histories. We prove the existence of local preferences for moves and of strategic fixpoints that allow to map game-trees to tableaux proofs, and exhibit a strategy prole that solves the fixpoint selection problem, and can be mapped to systematic constructions of semantic trees, yielding a completeness result by translation. We then discuss the correspondence between proof heuristics and strategies in our games, the relations of our games to gts, and possible extensions to other entailment relations. We conclude that the main interest of our result lies in the possibility to bridge argumentative and cognitive models of logical reasoning, rather than in new meta-theoretic results. All proofs are given in appendix. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/5038683
- author
- Genot, Emmanuel LU and Jacot, Justine LU
- organization
- publishing date
- 2014
- type
- Contribution to conference
- publication status
- unpublished
- subject
- conference name
- The Eleventh Conference on Logic and the Foundations of Game and Decision Theory
- conference location
- Bergen, Norway
- conference dates
- 2014-07-27 - 2014-07-30
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- adc61661-d753-4ff5-a198-4c778114c482 (old id 5038683)
- date added to LUP
- 2016-04-04 12:55:01
- date last changed
- 2018-11-21 21:11:21
@misc{adc61661-d753-4ff5-a198-4c778114c482,
abstract = {{If semantic consequence is analyzed with extensive games, logical reasoning can be accounted for by looking at how players solve entailment games. However, earlier approaches to game semantics cannot achieve this reduction, by want of explicitly dened preferences for players. Moreover, although entailment games<br/><br>
can naturally translate the idea of argumentation about a common ground, a cognitive interpretation is undermined by the complexity of strategic reasoning. We thus describe a class of semantic extensive entailment game with algorithmic players, who have preferences for parsimonious spending of computational resources and thus compute partial strategies under qualitative uncertainty about future histories. We prove the existence of local preferences for moves and of strategic fixpoints that allow to map game-trees to tableaux proofs, and exhibit a strategy prole that solves the fixpoint selection problem, and can be mapped to systematic constructions of semantic trees, yielding a completeness result by translation. We then discuss the correspondence between proof heuristics and strategies in our games, the relations of our games to gts, and possible extensions to other entailment relations. We conclude that the main interest of our result lies in the possibility to bridge argumentative and cognitive models of logical reasoning, rather than in new meta-theoretic results. All proofs are given in appendix.}},
author = {{Genot, Emmanuel and Jacot, Justine}},
language = {{eng}},
title = {{Semantic games for first-order entailment with algorithmic players}},
year = {{2014}},
}