Abstract
We outline the Abstract Contract Calculator, a prototype language implemented in Haskell (a declarative programming language) in which we model agents executing abstract actions relative to deontic concepts derived from Standard Deontic Logic and Dynamic Deontic Logic. The concepts of abstract actions are derived from Dynamic Logic. The logics are declarative, while the implementation is operational. Actions have explicit action preconditions and postconditions. We have deontic specification of complex actions. We implement a Contrary-to-Duty Obligations case. We distinguish Contrary-to-Duty Obligations from obligations on sequences, which has not previously been accounted for in the literature. The central innovation is the expression of complex violation and fulfillment markers. The language can be used to express a range of alternative notions of actions and deontic specification.
The author thanks Tom Maibaum, Andrew Jones, and reviewers for comments, and Hewlett-Packard Research Labs, Bristol, UK for financial support. Errors rest with the author.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aldewereld, H., Grossi, D., Vazquez-Salceda, J., Dignum, F.: Designing normative behaviour by the use of landmarks. In: Lindeman, G., Ossowski, S., Padget, J., Vazquez-Salceda, J. (eds.) Proceedings of AAMAS 2005, Fourth International Workshop on Agents, Norms and Institution for Regulated Multi Agent Systems, Utrecht, pp. 5–18 (2005)
Anderson, A., Moore, O.: The formal analysis of normative concepts. The American Sociological Review, 22(1), 9–17 (1957); Reprinted in: Copi, I.M., Gould, J.A. (eds.) Contemporary Readings in Logical Theory. MacMillan, New York (1967)
Boella, G., van der Torre, L.: An architecture of a normative system. In: Proceedings of AAMAS 2006 (2006)
Carmo, J., Jones, A.: Deontic logic and contrary-to-duties. In: Gabbay, D., Guenthner, F. (eds.) Handbook of Philosophical Logic, 2nd edn., pp. 265–343. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2002)
d’Altan, P., Meyer, J.-J., Wieringa, R.: An integrated framework for ought–to–be and ought–to–do constraints. Artificial Intelligence and Law 2(4), 77–111 (1996); Revised version, dated 1998 at website; page references to download
Doets, K., van Eijck, J.: The Haskell Road to Logic, Maths and Programming. King’s College Publications (2004)
García-Camino, A., Rodríguez-Aguilar, J., Sierra, C., Vasconcelos, W.W.: A distributed architecture for norm-aware agent societies. In: Baldoni, M., Endriss, U., Omicini, A., Torroni, P. (eds.) DALT 2005. LNCS, vol. 3904, pp. 89–105. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
Harel, D., Kozen, D., Tiuryn, J.: Dynamic Logic. The MIT Press, Cambridge (2000)
Jones, A., Sergot, M.: On the characterisation of law and computer systems: the normative systems perspective. In: Meyer, J.-J.Ch., Wieringa, R.J. (eds.) Deontic Logic in Computer Science – Normative System Specification, pp. 275–307. Wiley, Chichester (1993)
Kent, S., Maibaum, T., Quirk, W.: Formally specifying temporal contraints and error recovery. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on Requirements Engineering, pp. 208–215. IEEE C.S. Press, Los Alamitos (1993)
Khosla, S., Maibaum, T.: The prescription and description of state-based systems. In: Banieqbal, B., Barringer, H., Pneuli, A. (eds.) Temporal Logic in Specification, pp. 243–294. Springer, Heidelberg (1987)
Lomuscio, A., Nute, D. (eds.): Deontic Logic in Computer Science: Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Deontic Logic in Computer Science. Springer, London (2004)
Meyer, J.-J.: A different approach to deontic logic: Deontic logic viewed as a variant of dynamic logic. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 29(1), 109–136 (1988)
Royakkers, L.: Representing Legal Rules in Deontic Logic. PhD thesis, Katholieke Universiteit Brabant, Tilburg (1996)
Sergot, M.: (c+) + + : An action language for modelling norms and institutions, http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/research/technicalreports/2004/DTR04-8.pdf
Sergot, M.: The representation of law in computer programs. In: Bench-Capon, T.J.M. (ed.) Knowledge-Based Systems and Legal Applications, pp. 3–67. Academic Press, London (1991)
van der Meyden., R.: The dynamic logic of permission. Journal of Logic and Computation 6(3), 465–479 (1996)
van Eijck, J.: Computational semantics and type theory. Website download (2004)
Wieringa, R., Meyer, J.-J.: Actors, actions, and initiative in normative system specification. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, 289–346 (1993)
Wieringa, R., Meyer, J.-J. (eds.): Deontic Logic in Computer Science: Normative System Specification. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester (1993)
Wyner, A.Z.: Violations and Fulfillments in the Formal Representation of Contracts. PhD thesis, Department of Computer Science, King’s College London (in preparation, 2006)
Wyner, A.Z.: Sequences, obligations, and the contrary-to-duty paradox. In: Goble, L., Meyer, J.-J. (eds.) Deontic Logic and Artificial Normative Systems: Proceedings of the 8th International Workshop on Deontic Logic in Computer Science, pp. 255–271. Springer, Berlin (2006)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2006 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Wyner, A.Z. (2006). A Functional Program for Agents, Actions, and Deontic Specifications. In: Baldoni, M., Endriss, U. (eds) Declarative Agent Languages and Technologies IV. DALT 2006. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 4327. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/11961536_16
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/11961536_16
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-68959-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-68961-4
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)