Belief closure: A semantics of common knowledge for modal propositional logic
The paper axiomatizes individual and common belief by means of modal propositional logic systems of varying strength. The weakest system of all just requires the monotonicity of individual belief on top of the axiom and rules of common belief. It is proved to be sound and complete with respect to a specially devised variant of neighbourhood semantiC's. The remaining systems include a K-system for each individual. They are shown to be sound and complete with respect to suitable variants of Kripke semantics. The specific features of either neighbourhood or Kripke semantics in this paper relate to the validation clause for common belief. Informally, we define a proposition to be belief closed if everybody believes it at every world where it is true, and we define a proposition to be common belief at a world if it is implied by a belief closed proposition that everybody believes at that particular world. This "fixed-point" or "circular" account of common belief is seen to imply the more standard "iterate" account in terms of countably infinite sequences of share beliefs. Axiomatizations of common knowledge can be secured by adding the truth axiom of individual belief to any system. The paper also briefly discusses game-theoretic papers which anticipated the belief closure semantics.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- D. Samet, 1987.
"Ignoring Ignorance and Agreeing to Disagree,"
749, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
- Ronald Fagin & Joseph Y. Halpern & Yoram Moses & Moshe Y. Vardi, 2003. "Reasoning About Knowledge," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262562006, June.
- Kaneko, Mamoru & Nagashima, Takashi, 1991. "Final decisions, the Nash equilibrium and solvability in games with common knowledge of logical abilities," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 229-255, December.
- Milgrom, Paul, 1981.
"An Axiomatic Characterization of Common Knowledge,"
Econometric Society, vol. 49(1), pages 219-22, January.
- Monderer, Dov & Samet, Dov, 1989. "Approximating common knowledge with common beliefs," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 1(2), pages 170-190, June.
- Modica, Salvatore & Rustichini, Aldo, 1999. "Unawareness and Partitional Information Structures," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 265-298, May.
- Bacharach, Michael, 1985. "Some extensions of a claim of Aumann in an axiomatic model of knowledge," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 167-190, October.
- LISMONT, Luc & MONGIN, Philippe, 1994. "On the Logic of Common Belief and Common Knowledge," CORE Discussion Papers 1994005, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
- John Geanakoplos, 1992. "Common Knowledge," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 6(4), pages 53-82, Fall.
- Robert J Aumann, 1999. "Agreeing to Disagree," Levine's Working Paper Archive 512, David K. Levine.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:matsoc:v:30:y:1995:i:2:p:127-153. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.