B. van Linder
- Artificial Intelligence top 10%
- Computational Theory and Mathematics
- Social Psychology
- Philosophy
- Management Science and Operations Research
- Topics
- Logic, Reasoning, and Knowledge (8 papers)Multi-Agent Systems and Negotiation (7 papers)Semantic Web and Ontologies (4 papers)
- Partner nations
- Netherlands
In The Last Decade
B. van Linder
12 papers receiving 127 citations
Peers
Comparison fields: 5 of 13
- Artificial Intelligence 144
- Computational Theory and Mathematics 23
- Social Psychology 13
- Philosophy 10
- Management Science and Operations Research 9
Countries citing papers authored by B. van Linder
This map shows the geographic impact of B. van Linder's research. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by B. van Linder with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites B. van Linder more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by B. van Linder
This network shows the impact of papers produced by B. van Linder. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers produced by B. van Linder. The network helps show where B. van Linder may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of B. van Linder
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of B. van Linder. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of B. van Linder based on the total number of citations received by their joint publications. Widths of edges represent the number of papers authors have co-authored together. Node borders signify the number of papers an author published with B. van Linder. B. van Linder is excluded from the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
All Works
| # | Work | Indexed citations |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 70 | |
| 2 | 17 | |
| 3 | 27 | |
| 4 | Formalizing motivational attitudes of agents using the KARO framework | 2 |
| 5 | 5 | |
| 6 | 2 | |
| 7 | Modelling rational agents in a dynamic environment: Putting humpty dumpty together again | 3 |
| 8 | A dynamic logic of iterated belief change | 1 |
| 9 | Unravelling nondeterminism: on having the ability to choose (extended abstract) | 5 |
| 10 | Tests as epistemic updates | 10 |
| 11 | Actions that Make you Change your Mind --- Belief Revision in an Agent-Oriented Setting | 2 |
| 12 | Tests as epistemic updates - pursuit of knowledge | 2 |
| 13 | Unravelling nondeterminism: On having the ability to choose | 2 |
About B. van Linder
B. van Linder is a scholar working on Artificial Intelligence, Computational Theory and Mathematics and Philosophy, having authored 13 papers that have together received 148 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Logic, Reasoning, and Knowledge (8 papers), Multi-Agent Systems and Negotiation (7 papers) and Semantic Web and Ontologies (4 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Artificial Intelligence (144 citations), Computational Theory and Mathematics (23 citations) and Philosophy (10 citations). B. van Linder has collaborated with scholars based in Netherlands. Frequent co-authors include Wiebe van der Hoek, John-Jules Meyer, John‐Jules Ch. Meyer, J-J.Ch. Meyer and Frank Dignum. Their work appears in journals such as Artificial Intelligence, Data & Knowledge Engineering and Mathematical Social Sciences.
Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.