The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Logics of communication and change
Open accessOverview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“This leads to a mechanism of product update , turning the current epistemic model M into a model MxA which can even be larger than M itself, recording information of different agents about base facts and what others know.”
From THE STORIES OF LOGIC AND INFORMATION (2008) · cites this paper as van Benthem, van Eijck & Kooi 2006
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“In general dynamic-epistemic logics (Baltag, Moss & Solecki 1998, Gerbrandy 1999, van Benthem, van Eijck & Kooi 2006, van Ditmarsch, van der Hoek & Kooi 2007), so-called event models A describe complex scenarios where not all agents have the same observational access to what is happening.”
From THE STORIES OF LOGIC AND INFORMATION (2008) · cites this paper as van Benthem, van Eijck & Kooi 2006
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 12
- Baltag, 2004, Logics for epistemic programs, Synthese, 139, 165, 10.1023/B:SYNT.0000024912.56773.5e · DOI
- J. van Benthem, Information update as relativization, ILLC, University of Amsterdam, 2000, Available from http://staff.science.uva.nl/~johan/upd=Rel.pdf. · DOI
- J. van Benthem, One is a lonely number: on the logic of communication. Technical Report PP-2002-27, ILLC, Amsterdam, 2002, in: P. Koepke et al. (Eds.), Colloquium Logicum, Münster, 2002, AMS Publications, Providence (to appear).
- J. van Benthem, Open problems in logical dynamics, ILLC Prepublication PP-2005-06, ILLC Amsterdam, 2005. · DOI
- H. P. van Ditmarsch, Knowledge Games, Ph.D. thesis, ILLC, Amsterdam, 2000.
- B. Kooi, J. van Benthem, Reduction axioms for epistemic actions, in: R. Schmidt, I. Pratt-Hartmann, M. Reynolds, H. Wansing (Eds.), AiML-2004: Advances in Modal Logic, number UMCS-04-9-1 in Technical Report Series, University of Manchester, 2004, pp. 197–211.
- C. Lutz, Complexity and succinctness of public announcement logic, in: Proceedings AAMAS-06: Fifth International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, Hakodate, Japan, 2006. · DOI
- Miller, 2005, The undecidability of iterated modal relativization, Studia Logica, 79, 373, 10.1007/s11225-005-3612-9 · DOI
- Parikh, 2003, A knowledge based semantics of messages, Journal of Logic, Language and Information, 12, 453, 10.1023/A:1025007018583 · DOI
- J. A. Plaza, Logics of public communications, in: M.L. Emrich, M.S. Pfeifer, M. Hadzikadic, Z.W. Ras (Eds.), Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Methodologies for Intelligent Systems, 1989, pp. 201–216.
- J. Ruan, Exploring the Update Universe, Master’s thesis, ILLC, Amsterdam, 2004.
- H. Tuominen, Translations from epistemic into dynamic logic, in: Y. Kodratoff (Ed.), ECAI-88: proceedings of the 8th European conference on Artificial Intelligence, 1988, pp. 586–588.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
THE STORIES OF LOGIC AND INFORMATION
van Benthem, J., & Martinez, M. (2008) · Philosophy of Information · doi:10.1016/b978-0-444-51726-5.50012-1 · Cited by 80
Metadata
- Authors
- Benthem, J. V., Eijck, J. V., & Kooi, B.
- Affiliations
- University of Groningen (NL)
- Venue
- Information and Computation
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2006-11
- Volume
- 204
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 1620-1662
- ISSN
- 0890-5401 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2607243954
- Cited by
- 287
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 22 · 2012: 11
- FWCI
- 15.59
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Information and Computation (publishedVersion)
- UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (publishedVersion)
- University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
- Centrum Wiskunde & Informatica (CWI), the national research institute for mathematics and computer science in the Netherlands (submittedVersion)
- UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (submittedVersion)
- University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Technical reports
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Logic, Reasoning, and Knowledge
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Multi-Agent Systems and Negotiation
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Game Theory and Applications
- Keywords
- dynamic epistemic logic, common knowledge, multi-agent communication, public announcement, propositional dynamic logic, reduction axioms, action models, Kleene's theorem
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
