Yes / We examine how managers in Oman make sense of localization policies (Omanization) through their use of talent management (TM). Through an institutional logics (IL) lens, it is possible to examine how organizations confront institutional complexity and understand the interplay between state, market and societal logics. The paper analyses twenty-six interviews with managers in the Petroleum and Banking sector and is the first to examine TM within the context of Omanization using a layered, IL perspective. The paper finds that punitive state logics encourage organizations to focus on the societal wellbeing of their TM measures and inspires a sense of corporate social responsibility. Yet, the market logic dictates a stratified and differentiated approach that manages impressions of inclusivity while safeguarding organizational interests.

Thesis advisor: Mary Ann Glynn / Thesis advisor: Jean Bartunek / Organizational scholars use the concept of institutional logics to define and distinguish between multiple co-existing institutions that constitute the diverse cultural landscapes of contemporary societies. Research on institutional logics has devoted considerable attention to understanding how actors use rhetoric associated with distinct institutional logics as tools of institutional transformation. However, prior research has not typically examined rhetoric aimed at transforming institutions with broad societal impact, such as public or governmental institutions, which limits the generalizability of empirical findings. This dissertation renews the logics literature’s original emphasis on societal institutions and offers necessary clarification on how the central logics of two major societal institutions, the state and the market, may change in relation to each another through the rhetorical agency of state actors. In two studies, the dissertation examines the dynamics between the state logic and the market logic embedded in the rhetoric of the Clinton administration on its high-profile federal management reform, known as “Reinventing Government,” and related discussions in the United States Congress over a seven-year period (1993-2000). Study 1 focuses on how the administration constructed and revised rhetoric to justify replacing the prevailing state logic with the market logic to key stakeholders. Study 2 focuses on how the rhetoric of congressional lawmakers expressed heterogeneous legitimacy criteria that differed in priority given to the state logic versus the market logic. The studies provide convergent findings that suggest logic replacement is an unlikely form of institutional change at the societal level of analysis; however, the state logic may change by combining with elements of the market logic to form new layers of content over time. / Thesis (PhD) — Boston College, 2024. / Submitted to: Boston College. Carroll School of Management. / Discipline: Management and Organization.

In this thesis we extend BDI logics, which are normal multimodal logics with an arbitrary set of normal modal operators, from three different perspectives. Firstly, based on some recent developments in modal logic, we examine BDI logics from a combining logic perspective and apply combination techniques like fibring/dovetailing for explaining them. The second perspective is to extend the underlying logics so as to include action constructs in an explicit way based on some recent action-related theories. The third perspective is to adopt a non-monotonic logic like defeasible logic to reason about intentions in BDI. As such, the research captured in this thesis is theoretical in nature and situated at the crossroads of various disciplines relevant to Artificial Intelligence (AI). More specifically this thesis makes the following contributions: 1. Combining BDI Logics through fibring/dovetailing: BDI systems modeling rational agents have a combined system of logics of belief, time and intention which in turn are basically combinations of well understood modal logics. The idea behind combining logics is to develop general techniques that allow to produce combinations of existing and well understood logics. To this end we adopt Gabbay's fibring/dovetailing technique to provide a general framework for the combinations of BDI logics. We show that the existing BDI framework is a dovetailed system. Further we give conditions on the fibring function to accommodate interaction axioms of the type G [superscript k,l,m,n] ([diamond][superscript k] [superscript l] [phi] [implies] [superscript m] [diamond][superscript n] [phi]) based on Catach's multimodal semantics. This is a major result when compared with other combining techniques like fusion which fails to accommodate axioms of the above type. 2. Extending the BDI framework to accommodate Composite Actions: Taking motivation from a recent work on BDI theory, we incorporate the notion of composite actions, [pi]-1; [pi]-2 (interpreted as [pi]-1 followed by [pi]-2), to the existing BDI framework. To this end we introduce two new constructs Result and Opportunity which helps in reasoning about the actual execution of such actions. We give a set of axioms that can accommodate the new constructs and analyse the set of commitment axioms as given in the original work in the background of the new framework. 3. Intention reasoning as Defeasible reasoning: We argue for a non-monotonic logic of intention in BDI as opposed to the usual normal modal logic one. Our argument is based on Bratman's policy-based intention. We show that policy-based intention has a defeasible/non-monotonic nature and hence the traditional normal modal logic approach to reason about such intentions fails. We give a formalisation of policy-based intention in the background of defeasible logic. The problem of logical omniscience which usually accompanies normal modal logics is avoided to a great extend through such an approach.

Temporal logics are a very popular family of logical languages, used to specify properties of abstracted systems. In the last few years, many extensions of temporal logics have been proposed, in order to address the need to express more than just abstract properties. In our work we study temporal logics extended by local constraints, which allow to express quantitative properties on data values from an arbitrary relational structure called the concrete domain. An example of concrete domain can be (Z, <, =), where the integers are considered as a relational structure over the binary order relation and the equality relation. Formulas of temporal logics with constraints are evaluated on data-words or data-trees, in which each node or position is labeled by a vector of data from the concrete domain. We call the constraints local because they can only compare values at a fixed distance inside such models. Several positive results regarding the satisfiability of LTL (linear temporal logic) with constraints over the integers have been established in the past years, while the corresponding results for branching time logics were only partial. In this work we prove that satisfiability of CTL* (computation tree logic) with constraints over the integers is decidable and also lift this result to ECTL*, a proper extension of CTL*. We also consider other classes of concrete domains, particularly ones that are \"tree-like\". We consider semi-linear orders, ordinal trees and trees of a fixed height, and prove decidability in this framework as well. At the same time we prove that our method cannot be applied in the case of the infinite binary tree or the infinitely branching infinite tree. We also look into extending the expressiveness of our logic adding non-local constraints, and find that this leads to undecidability of the satisfiability problem, even on very simple domains like (Z, <, =). We then find a way to restrict the power of the non-local constraints to regain decidability.

Internet and digital media have profoundly reorganised the radio landscape by giving birth to new formats and patterns of radio listening. Today, traditional radio actors systematically use online platforms to diffuse their programs and communicate with their audience. This master thesis offers a case study and examines how Radio FIP, a French music station of public service, uses its digital devices to diffuse its program and produce content online. On the basis of existing researches on radio and radio diffusion online, and with the help of the concepts of format, media logics and hybrid media system, the author of this paper defines two logics of traditional radio and radio online used as reference in order to analysis the influence of media logics on the station’s material and formats online.   Observation of Radio FIP’s website and social media pages on Facebook and Twitter showed  a clear influence of radio online logics in the visual and informative extra content, the additional audio offers through online webradio streams, the promotion of non linear and asynchronous formats of radio listening’s and the incorporation of networked media frames. At the same time, logics of traditional radio prove to be also very significant with the pre-eminence and promotion of the station’s on air broadcast on digital devices and the reproduction of traditional radio patterns of temporality, music prescription and vertical communication on social media platforms. The coexistence of the two logics in Radio FIP online platforms characterises the station’s digital apparatus as a hybrid media space, and opens up new research trails for better understanding what influence the content formats of radio stations diffusing online.

In the last two decades, qualitative spatial representation and reasoning, and in particular spatial logics, have been the subject of an increased interest from the Artificial Intelligence community. By a spatial logic, we understand a formal language whose variables range over subsets of a fixed topological space, called regions, and whose non-logical primitives have fixed geometric meanings. A spatial logic for reasoning about regions in a Euclidean space is called a Euclidean spatial logic. We consider first-order and quantifier-free Euclidean spatial logics with primitives for topological relations and operations, the property of convexity and the ternary relation of being closer-than. We mainly focus on the computational properties of such logics, but we also obtain interesting model-theoretic results. We provide a systematic overview of the computational properties of firstorder Euclidean spatial logics and fill in some of the gaps left by the literature. We establish upper complexity bounds for the (undecidable) theories of logics based on Euclidean spaces of dimension greater than one, which yields tight complexity bounds for all but two of these theories. In contrast with these undecidability results, we show that the topological theories based on one-dimensional Euclidean space are decidable, but non-elementary. We also study the computational properties of quantifier-free Euclidean spatial logics, and in particular those able to express the property of connectedness. It is known that when variables range over regions in the Euclidean plane, one can find formulas in these languages satisfiable only by regions with infinitely many connected components. Using this result, we show that the corresponding logics are undecidable. Further, we show that there exist formulas that are satisfiable in higher-dimensional Euclidean space, but only by regions with infinitely many connected components. We finish by outlining how the insights gained from this result were used (by another author) to show the undecidability of certain quantifier-free Euclidean spatial logics in higher dimensions.

We live in an era of data and information, where an immeasurable amount of discoveries, findings, events, news, and transactions are generated every second. Governments, companies, or individuals have to employ and process all that data for knowledge-based decision-making (i.e. a decision-making process that uses predetermined criteria to measure and ensure the optimal outcome for a specific topic), which then prompt them to view the knowledge as valuable resource. In this knowledge-based view, the capability to create and utilize knowledge is the key source of an organization or individual’s competitive advantage. This dynamic nature of knowledge leads us to the study of belief revision (or belief change), an area which emerged from work in philosophy and then impacted further developments in computer science and artificial intelligence. In belief revision area, the AGM postulates by Alchourrón, Gärdenfors, and Makinson continue to represent a cornerstone in research related to belief change. Katsuno and Mendelzon (K&M) adopted the AGM postulates for changing belief bases and characterized AGM belief base revision in propositional logic over finite signatures. In this thesis, two research directions are considered. In the first, by considering the semantic point of view, we generalize K&M’s approach to the setting of (multiple) base revision in arbitrary Tarskian logics, covering all logics with a classical model-theoretic semantics and hence a wide variety of logics used in knowledge representation and beyond. Our generic formulation applies to various notions of “base”, such as belief sets, arbitrary or finite sets of sentences, or single sentences. The core result is a representation theorem showing a two-way correspondence between AGM base revision operators and certain “assignments”: functions mapping belief bases to total — yet not transitive — “preference” relations between interpretations. Alongside, we present a companion result for the case when the AGM postulate of syntax-independence is abandoned. We also provide a characterization of all logics for which our result can be strengthened to assignments producing transitive preference relations (as in K&M’s original work), giving rise to two more representation theorems for such logics, according to syntax dependence vs. independence. The second research direction in this thesis explores two approaches for revising description logic knowledge bases under fixed-domain semantics, namely model-based approach and individual-based approach. In this logical setting, models of the knowledge bases can be enumerated and can be computed to produce the revision result, semantically. We show a characterization of the AGM revision operator for this logic and present a concrete model-based revision approach via distance between interpretations. In addition, by weakening the KB based on certain domain elements, a novel individual-based revision operator is provided as an alternative approach.

A area de revisão de crenças estuda como agentes racionais mudam suas crencas ao receberem novas informações. O marco da area de revisão de crenças foi a publicacão do trabalho de Alchourron, Gardenfors e Makinson. Nesse trabalho conhecido como paradigma AGM foram denidos criterios de racionalidade para tipos de mudanca de crencas. Desde então, a área de revisão de crenças foi influenciada por diversas disciplinas como filosoa, computacão e direito. Paralelamente ao desenvolvimento da area de revisão de crenças, os últimos 20 anos foram marcados por um grande avanço no estudo das logicas de descrição. Tal avanço, impulsionado pelo desenvolvimento da web-semântica, levou a adoção de linguagens inspiradas em logicas de descrição (OWL) como padrão para se representar ontologias na web. Nessa tese tratamos do problema de aplicar a teoria da revisão de crenças a lógicas não clássicas e especialmente a logicas de descric~ao. Trabalhos recentes mostraram que o paradigma AGM e incompatvel com diversas logicas de descricão. Estendemos esses resultados mostrando outras lógicas que não são compatíveis com o paradigma AGM. Propomos formas de aplicar a teoria de revisão tanto em bases quanto em conjuntos de crencas a essas logicas. Alem disso, usamos algoritmos conhecidos da área de depuração de ontologias para implementar operações em bases de crenças. / Belief revision theory studies how rational agents change their beliefs after receiving new information. The most in uential work in this area is the paper of Alchourron, Gardenfors and Makinson. In this work, known as AGM paradigm rationality criteria for belief change were dened. Since then, the eld has been in uenced by many areas like philosophy, computer science and law. Parallel to the development of belief revision eld, in the past 20 years there was a huge grow in the study of description logics. The climax of this development was the adoption of OWL (a language based on description logics) as the standard language to represent ontologies on the web. In this work we deal with the problem of applying belief revision in to non-classical logics, specially description logics. Recent works showed that the AGM paradigm is not compliant with several description logics. We have extended this work by showing that other logics are not compliant with AGM paradigm. Furthermore, we propose alternative ways to apply belief revision techniques to these logics. Finally, we show that well known algorithms from the area of ontology debugging eld can be used to implement the proposed constructions.

We investigate the expressive power of different fragments of higher-order logics over finite relational structures (or equivalently, relational databases) with special emphasis in higher-order logics of order greater than or equal three. Our main results concern the study of the effect on the expressive power of higher-order logics, of simultaneously bounding the arity of the higher-order variables and the alternation of quantifiers.

Adaptive reuse of parametric finite element analysis (FEA) models is a common form of reuse that involves integrating new information into an archived FEA model to apply it towards a new similar physical problem. Adaptive reuse of archived FEA models is often motivated by the need to assess the impact of minor improvements to component-based designs such as addition of new structural components, or the need to assess new failure modes that arise when a device is redesigned for new operating environments or loading conditions. Successful adaptive reuse of FEA models involves reference to supporting documents that capture the formulation of the model to determine what new information can be integrated and how. However, FEA models and supporting documents are not stored in formats that are semantically rich enough to support automated inference of their relevance to a modelers needs. The modelers inability to precisely describe information needs and execute queries based on such requirements results in inefficient queries and time spent manually assessing irrelevant models. The central research question in this research is thus how do we incorporate a modelers intent into automated retrieval of FEA models for adaptive reuse? An automated retrieval method to support adaptive reuse of parametric FEA models has been developed in the research documented in this thesis. The method consists of a classification-based retrieval method based on ALE subsumption hierarchies that classify models using semantically rich description logic representations of physical problem structure and a reusability-based ranking method. Conceptual data models have been developed for the representations that support both retrieval and ranking of archived FEA models. The method is validated using representations of FEA models of several classes of electronic chip packages. Experimental results indicate that the properties of the representation methods support effective automation of retrieval functions for FEA models of component-based designs.