{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,1,5]],"date-time":"2026-01-05T18:37:30Z","timestamp":1767638250189,"version":"3.48.0"},"reference-count":15,"publisher":"Maximum Academic Press","issue":"1","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2011,2,7]],"date-time":"2011-02-07T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1297036800000},"content-version":"unspecified","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/core\/terms"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["The Knowledge Engineering Review"],"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:p>\n                    Game theory is becoming central to the design and analysis of computational mechanisms in which multiple entities interact strategically. The tools of\n                    <jats:italic>mechanism design<\/jats:italic>\n                    are used extensively to engineer incentives for truth revelation into resource allocation (e.g. combinatorial auctions) and preference aggregation protocols (e.g. voting). We argue that mechanism design can also be useful in the design of logical inference procedures. In particular, it can help us understand and engineer inference procedures when knowledge is distributed among self-interested agents. We set a research agenda for this emerging area, and point to some early research efforts.\n                  <\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.1017\/s0269888910000421","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2011,2,7]],"date-time":"2011-02-07T05:07:28Z","timestamp":1297055248000},"page":"61-69","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":3,"title":["Logical mechanism design"],"prefix":"10.48130","volume":"26","author":[{"given":"Iyad","family":"Rahwan","sequence":"first","affiliation":[]},{"given":"Kate","family":"Larson","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]}],"member":"27968","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2011,2,7]]},"reference":[{"key":"S0269888910000421_ref12","unstructured":"Rahwan I. , Larson K. 2008. Mechanism design for abstract argumentation, In 7th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents & Multi Agent Systems, AAMAS'2008, Padgham, L., Parkes, D., Mueller, J. & Parsons, S. (eds). Estoril, Portugal, 1031\u20131038."},{"key":"S0269888910000421_ref4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/0004-3702(94)00041-X"},{"key":"S0269888910000421_ref3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1145\/1236457.1236461"},{"key":"S0269888910000421_ref10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1017\/CBO9780511800481"},{"key":"S0269888910000421_ref14","unstructured":"Rahwan I. , Larson K. , Tohm\u00e9 F. 2009. A characterisation of strategy-proofness for grounded argumentation semantics In Proceedings of the 21st International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), Pasadena CA, USA, 251\u2013256."},{"key":"S0269888910000421_ref1","first-page":"29","article-title":"The semantic web","author":"Berners-Lee","year":"2001","journal-title":"Scientific American"},{"key":"S0269888910000421_ref5","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"49","DOI":"10.1613\/jair.2034","article-title":"The strategy-proofness landscape of merging","volume":"28","author":"Everaere","year":"2007","journal-title":"Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research"},{"key":"S0269888910000421_ref11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1080\/11663081.1997.10510900"},{"key":"S0269888910000421_ref7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1006\/game.2000.0824"},{"key":"S0269888910000421_ref2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.inffus.2005.05.003"},{"key":"S0269888910000421_ref9","first-page":"193","volume-title":"Infinitistic Methods","author":"Lorenzen","year":"1961"},{"key":"S0269888910000421_ref15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1017\/CBO9780511811654"},{"volume-title":"The Oxford Handbook of Rational and Social Choice","year":"2009","author":"List","key":"S0269888910000421_ref8"},{"key":"S0269888910000421_ref6","first-page":"179","volume-title":"What is a Logical System?","author":"Gabbay","year":"1995"},{"key":"S0269888910000421_ref13","unstructured":"Rahwan I. , Tohm\u00e9 F. 2010. Collective argument evaluation as judgement aggregation. In 9th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents & Multi Agent Systems, AAMAS'2010, Toronto, Canada."}],"container-title":["The Knowledge Engineering Review"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/core\/services\/aop-cambridge-core\/content\/view\/S0269888910000421","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,1,5]],"date-time":"2026-01-05T14:44:04Z","timestamp":1767624244000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/core\/product\/identifier\/S0269888910000421\/type\/journal_article"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2011,2,7]]},"references-count":15,"journal-issue":{"issue":"1","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2011,2,7]]}},"alternative-id":["S0269888910000421"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1017\/s0269888910000421","relation":{},"ISSN":["0269-8889","1469-8005"],"issn-type":[{"type":"print","value":"0269-8889"},{"type":"electronic","value":"1469-8005"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2011,2,7]]}}}