Glossary

Awareness (of a proposition by an agent): An agent’s (second-order) knowledge of his/her knowledge of a proposition. More precisely, the agent’s knowledge of the proposition Q: I know P. (Chapter 2)

Belief (in the truth of a proposition by an agent): An agent’s credence of a proposition, P, to some degree that is less than full knowledge of the proposition. (Chapter 2)

Clout (of an agent): The fraction of agents in an epinet whose epistemic states change as a function of discovering that agent’s epistemic state (provided it differs from their own). (Chapter 3)

Common belief (of a proposition by two or more agents): A state or situation in which each agent believes the proposition, P, knows that other agents believe it, and so forth, ad infinitum. (Chapter 2)

Common knowledge (of a proposition by two or more agents): A state or situation in which each agent knows the proposition, P, knows that other agents know it, and so forth, ad infinitum. (Chapter 2)

Coordinata (of an epinet): A set of propositions that are relevant to the coordinative activities of a network—that is, those propositions that need to be almost-common knowledge in the epinet for the network to successfully coordinate. (Chapter 3)

Coordinator (of an epinet): An agent who is known by most agents in the network to know what everyone else knows or believes. (Chapter 3)

Epinet (“epistemic network”): A directed graph whose vertices represent (1) individual agents (humans, humanoid, cyber agents) and (2) relevant propositions, and whose edges represent epistemic relations (knows that, believes that) between agents and propositions or between agents and their epistemic states regarding the propositions. (Chapter 2)

Epistemic centrality of

Agents: The network centrality of an agent in an epinet; measures how well known to others in the network an agent’s own epistemic states are. (Chapter 3)

Propositions: The network centrality of a proposition, P, in an epinet; measures how known the proposition is, how known those who know it are for knowing it, and so on. (Chapter 3)

Epistemic preconditions for

Co-mobilization (of two or more agents in a network): The set of epistemic states that is sufficient for co-mobilization. (Chapter 2)

Coordination (of two or more agents in a network): The set of epistemic states that is sufficient for coordination. (Chapter 2)

Fame (of an agent or proposition in an epinet): The size of a subnetwork of an epinet whose agents know that that agent has some positive property, P. (Chapter 3)

Glory (of an agent or proposition in an epinet): The fraction of agents in an epinet who know of all agents that know that that agent has some positive property, P. (Chapter 3)

Ignorance (of a proposition by an agent): An epistemic state in which an agent knows that s/he does not know the truth value of a proposition, P, but knows of the possibility that the proposition is true. (Chapter 2)

Immunity (of an epinet to an epistemic attack): The degree to which an epinet survives a malicious epistemic move by one of its agents—that is, a move meant to destroy or alter the epinet’s epistemic structure. (Chapter 5)

Infamy (of an agent): The fraction of agents in an epinet who know that that agent has some negative property, N. (Chapter 3)

Knowledge (of a proposition by an agent): An intentional state connecting an agent, A, to a proposition, P, comprising the conditions that A believes P and that P is true. Unlike belief, knowledge of P implies the truth of P. (Chapter 2)

Knownness (of an agent): The fraction of agents in an epinet who know of that agent. (Chapter 3)

Mobilizer (of an epinet): An agent who knows what all or a majority of the other agents in the epinet know. (Chapter 3)

Move (by an agent in an epinet): The action taken by an agent that changes (1) the truth value of a proposition that is relevant to other network agents, (2) the epinet’s interactive epistemic structure, or (3) the combination of (1) and (2). (Chapter 5)

Mutual knowledge or belief (of a proposition by two or more agents): An epistemic state in which each agent knows (or believes) that another agent knows (or believes) a relevant proposition, P. (Chapter 2)

Mutual knowledge or belief neighborhood (of a network): A subnetwork of agents for whom some relevant proposition, P, is mutual knowledge (or belief). (Chapter 2)

Notoriety (of an agent or proposition in a network): The fraction of agents in an epinet who know of all agents that know that that agent has some negative property, N. (Chapter 3)

Oblivion (of an agent vis-à-vis a proposition): An epistemic state in which an agent does not know the proposition, P, and also does not know that s/he does not know it. (Chapter 2)

Proposition: A grammatically correct statement that has a specified set of truth conditions (for instance, conditions that verify or falsify it), or a well formed formula of first-order logic or predicate logic that has a specified set of truth conditions. (Chapter 2)

Reach (of an agent in an epinet): The fraction of agents in an epinet whose epistemic states change as a function of discovering the epistemic state of that agent. (Chapter 3)

Renown (of an agent in an epinet): The fraction of agents in an epinet who know all agents who know of that agent. (Chapter 3)

Robustness (of an epinet): The invariance of the epinet to involuntary distortion, corruption, or omission of information during transfer. (Chapter 5)

Security conduit (of an epinet): A channel (i.e., singly linked subnetwork) of trust-linked agents whose identity is common knowledge among them. (Chapter 4)

Security corridor (of an epinet): A two-way security conduit. (Chapter 4)

Security neighborhood (of an epinet): A subnetwork of trust-linked agents whose identity is common knowledge among them. (Chapter 4)

Stability (of an epinet): The invariance of the epinet to deductions made by agents from what they already know about the epinet’s structure. (Chapter 5)

Trust (epistemic model of): The epistemic relationship between two agents that safeguards the registration and passage of relevant information.

Trust in competence: A trusts in B’s competence if A knows that if some relevant proposition, P, were true, then B would know it. (Chapter 4)

Trust in integrity: A trusts in B’s integrity if A knows that if B knew some relevant proposition, P, then B would assert it to A. (Chapter 4)

Trust conduit (of an epinet): A channel (i.e., a singly linked subnetwork) of trust-linked agents. (Chapter 4)

Trust corridor (of an epinet): A two-way trust conduit. (Chapter 4)

Trust neighborhood (of an epinet): A subnetwork of trust-linked agents whose identity is not common knowledge among them. (Chapter 4)

Unawareness (of a proposition by an agent): An epistemic relation between an agent and a proposition, P, wherein the agent knows the proposition but does not know that s/he knows it (i.e., the proposition is not instantly recalled or easily accessible but is recognized if presented explicitly to the agent). (Chapter 2)

If you find an error or have any questions, please email us at admin@erenow.org. Thank you!