Reasoning about coalitional games.

We develop, investigate, and compare two logic-based knowledge representation formalisms for reasoning about coalitional games. The main constructs of Coalitional Game Logic (cgl) are expressions for representing the ability of coalitions, which may be combined with expressions for representing the...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Ågotnes, T, Hoek, W, Wooldridge, M
Format: Journal article
Language:English
Published: 2009
_version_ 1797087206896041984
author Ågotnes, T
Hoek, W
Wooldridge, M
author_facet Ågotnes, T
Hoek, W
Wooldridge, M
author_sort Ågotnes, T
collection OXFORD
description We develop, investigate, and compare two logic-based knowledge representation formalisms for reasoning about coalitional games. The main constructs of Coalitional Game Logic (cgl) are expressions for representing the ability of coalitions, which may be combined with expressions for representing the preferences that agents have over outcomes. Modal Coalitional Game Logic (mcgl) is a normal modal logic, in which the main construct is a modality for expressing the preferences of groups of agents. For both frameworks, we give complete axiomatisations, and show how they can be used to characterise solution concepts for coalitional games. We show that, while cgl is more expressive than mcgl, the former can only be used to reason about coalitional games with finitely many outcomes, while mcgl can be used to reason also about games with infinitely many outcomes, and is in addition more succinct. We characterise the computational complexity of satisfiability for cgl, and give a tableaux-based decision procedure. © 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
first_indexed 2024-03-07T02:32:32Z
format Journal article
id oxford-uuid:a7b9f820-ba93-44be-8ad4-1cc3630b8cdc
institution University of Oxford
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-07T02:32:32Z
publishDate 2009
record_format dspace
spelling oxford-uuid:a7b9f820-ba93-44be-8ad4-1cc3630b8cdc2022-03-27T02:56:28ZReasoning about coalitional games.Journal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:a7b9f820-ba93-44be-8ad4-1cc3630b8cdcEnglishSymplectic Elements at Oxford2009Ågotnes, THoek, WWooldridge, MWe develop, investigate, and compare two logic-based knowledge representation formalisms for reasoning about coalitional games. The main constructs of Coalitional Game Logic (cgl) are expressions for representing the ability of coalitions, which may be combined with expressions for representing the preferences that agents have over outcomes. Modal Coalitional Game Logic (mcgl) is a normal modal logic, in which the main construct is a modality for expressing the preferences of groups of agents. For both frameworks, we give complete axiomatisations, and show how they can be used to characterise solution concepts for coalitional games. We show that, while cgl is more expressive than mcgl, the former can only be used to reason about coalitional games with finitely many outcomes, while mcgl can be used to reason also about games with infinitely many outcomes, and is in addition more succinct. We characterise the computational complexity of satisfiability for cgl, and give a tableaux-based decision procedure. © 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
spellingShingle Ågotnes, T
Hoek, W
Wooldridge, M
Reasoning about coalitional games.
title Reasoning about coalitional games.
title_full Reasoning about coalitional games.
title_fullStr Reasoning about coalitional games.
title_full_unstemmed Reasoning about coalitional games.
title_short Reasoning about coalitional games.
title_sort reasoning about coalitional games
work_keys_str_mv AT agotnest reasoningaboutcoalitionalgames
AT hoekw reasoningaboutcoalitionalgames
AT wooldridgem reasoningaboutcoalitionalgames