Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Alexandru Baltag — Carmelics
    Thinkers/Alexandru Baltag
    AB

    Alexandru Baltag

    contemporaryDynamic Epistemic Logic, Formal Epistemology

    b. 1968

    Alexandru Baltag is a Romanian-Dutch logician and philosopher at the Institute for Logic, Language and Computation (ILLC) at the University of Amsterdam, specializing in dynamic epistemic logic, formal epistemology, and epistemic game theory. He is best known for developing rigorous logical frameworks for modeling how agents update beliefs in response to actions and information. His work bridges formal logic, philosophy of knowledge, and game theory.

    Notable Achievements

    1

    Co-developed Dynamic Epistemic Logic (DEL) and the Baltag-Moss-Solecki (BMS) update model for multi-agent belief revision

    2

    Extended belief revision theory to handle plausibility-based (lexicographic) updates and conditional beliefs

    3

    Formalized epistemic foundations of game theory, including analysis of backward induction and forward induction

    4

    Contributed to resolving foundational disputes in epistemic game theory (e.g., Aumann vs. Stalnaker on common knowledge and rationality)

    5

    Developed logical frameworks for reasoning about knowledge, belief, and action in interactive settings

    Positions & Arguments(2)

    Skepticism

    claim

    The difference in conclusions between Aumann (1995) and Stalnaker (1998) is due to differing models of belief revision upon deviation from the backward induction path

    claim

    Plausibility updates in sequential games during actual play differ in interpretation from plausibility updates used in pregame deliberation for Backward Induction.

    Truth & Knowledge

    claim

    At a Glance

    Ideas

    2

    Topics

    2

    Era

    contemporary

    Tradition

    Dynamic Epistemic Logic, Formal Epistemology

    Topic Influence

    Truth & Knowledge2
    Skepticism2

    Related Thinkers

    David Lewis2 shared

    The difference in conclusions between Aumann (1995) and Stalnaker (1998) is due to differing models of belief revision upon deviation from the backward induction path

    claim

    Plausibility updates in sequential games during actual play differ in interpretation from plausibility updates used in pregame deliberation for Backward Induction.

    Immanuel Kant
    2 shared
    Boyd2 shared
    Brian Skyrms2 shared
    Stathis Psillos2 shared
    Bertrand Russell2 shared
    David Hume2 shared
    Aristotle2 shared

    Dive Deeper

    Explore Truth & Knowledge→See Skepticism→