×
Well done. You've clicked the tower. This would actually achieve something if you had logged in first. Use the key for that. The name takes you home. This is where all the applicables sit. And you can't apply any changes to my site unless you are logged in.

Our policy is best summarized as "we don't care about _you_, we care about _them_", no emails, so no forgetting your password. You have no rights. It's like you don't even exist. If you publish material, I reserve the right to remove it, or use it myself.

Don't impersonate. Don't name someone involuntarily. You can lose everything if you cross the line, and no, I won't cancel your automatic payments first, so you'll have to do it the hard way. See how serious this sounds? That's how serious you're meant to take these.

×
Register


Required. 150 characters or fewer. Letters, digits and @/./+/-/_ only.
  • Your password can’t be too similar to your other personal information.
  • Your password must contain at least 8 characters.
  • Your password can’t be a commonly used password.
  • Your password can’t be entirely numeric.

Enter the same password as before, for verification.
Login

Grow A Dic
Define A Word
Make Space
Set Task
Mark Post
Apply Votestyle
Create Votes
(From: saved spaces)
Exclude Votes
Apply Dic
Exclude Dic

Click here to flash read.

Dynamic Epistemic Logic (DEL) provides a framework for epistemic planning
that is capable of representing non-deterministic actions, partial
observability, higher-order knowledge and both factual and epistemic change.
The high expressivity of DEL challenges existing epistemic planners, which
typically can handle only restricted fragments of the whole framework. The goal
of this work is to push the envelop of practical DEL planning, ultimately
aiming for epistemic planners to be able to deal with the full range of
features offered by DEL. Towards this goal, we question the traditional
semantics of DEL, defined in terms on Kripke models. In particular, we propose
an equivalent semantics defined using, as main building block, so-called
possibilities: non well-founded objects representing both factual properties of
the world, and what agents consider to be possible. We call the resulting
framework DELPHIC. We argue that DELPHIC indeed provides a more compact
representation of epistemic states. To substantiate this claim, we implement
both approaches in ASP and we set up an experimental evaluation to compare
DELPHIC with the traditional, Kripke-based approach. The evaluation confirms
that DELPHIC outperforms the traditional approach in space and time.

Click here to read this post out
ID: 301689; Unique Viewers: 0
Voters: 0
Latest Change: July 31, 2023, 7:31 a.m. Changes:
Dictionaries:
Words:
Spaces:
Comments:
Newcom
<0:100>