Source author record

Andrés Occhipinti Liberman

Andrés Occhipinti Liberman appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Catalog footprint

What is connected

2works
7topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2020arXiv

Dynamic Term-Modal Logics for First-Order Epistemic Planning

Many classical planning frameworks are built on first-order languages. The first-order expressive power is desirable for compactly representing actions via schemas, and for specifying quantified conditions such as $\neg\exists x\mathsf{blocks\_door}(x)$. In contrast, several recent epistemic planning frameworks are built on propositional epistemic logic. The epistemic language is useful to describe planning problems involving higher-order reasoning or epistemic goals such as $K_{a}\neg\mathsf{problem}$. This paper develops a first-order version of Dynamic Epistemic Logic (DEL). In this framework, for example, $\exists xK_{x}\exists y\mathsf{blocks\_door}(y)$ is a formula. The formalism combines the strengths of DEL (higher-order reasoning) with those of first-order logic (lifted representation) to model multi-agent epistemic planning. The paper introduces an epistemic language with a possible-worlds semantics, followed by novel dynamics given by first-order action models and their execution via product updates. Taking advantage of the first-order machinery, epistemic action schemas are defined to provide compact, problem-independent domain descriptions, in the spirit of PDDL. Concerning metatheory, the paper defines axiomatic normal term-modal logics, shows a Canonical Model Theorem-like result which allows establishing completeness through frame characterization formulas, shows decidability for the finite agent case, and shows a general completeness result for the dynamic extension by reduction axioms.

preprint2015arXiv

Does telling white lies signal pro-social preferences?

The opportunity to tell a white lie (i.e., a lie that benefits another person) generates a moral conflict between two opposite moral dictates, one pushing towards telling always the truth and the other pushing towards helping others. Here we study how people resolve this moral conflict. What does telling a white lie signal about a person's pro-social tendencies? To answer this question, we conducted a two-stage 2x2 experiment. In the first stage, we used a Deception Game to measure aversion to telling a Pareto white lie (i.e., a lie that helps both the liar and the listener), and aversion to telling an altruistic white lie (i.e., a lie that helps the listener at the expense of the liar). In the second stage we measured altruistic tendencies using a Dictator Game and cooperative tendencies using a Prisoner's dilemma. We found three major results: (i) both altruism and cooperation are positively correlated with aversion to telling a Pareto white lie; (ii) both altruism and cooperation are negatively correlated with aversion to telling an altruistic white lie; (iii) men are more likely than women to tell an altruistic white lie, but not to tell a Pareto white lie. Our results shed light on the moral conflit between pro-sociality and truth-telling. In particular, the first finding suggests that a significant proportion of people have non-distributional notions of what the right thing to do is: irrespective of their economic consequences, they tell the truth, they cooperate, they share their money.