Tracking and managing deemed abilities

n/

Modal Information Logics: Axiomatizations and Decidability

The present paper studies formal properties of so-called modal information logics (MILs)—modal logics first proposed in (van Benthem 1996) as a way of using possible-worlds semantics to model a theory of information. They do so by extending the language of propositional logic with a binary modality defined in terms of being the supremum of two states. First proposed in 1996, MILs have been around for some time, yet not much is known: (van Benthem 2017, 2019) pose two central open problems, namely (1) axiomatizing the two basic MILs of suprema on preorders and posets, respectively, and (2) proving (un)decidability. The main results of the first part of this paper are solving these two problems: (1) by providing an axiomatization [with a completeness proof entailing the two logics to be the same], and (2) by proving decidability. In the proof of the latter, an emphasis is put on the method applied as a heuristic for proving decidability ‘via completeness’ for semantically introduced logics; the logics lack the FMP w.r.t. their classes of definition, but not w.r.t. a generalized class. These results are build upon to axiomatize and prove decidable the MILs attained by endowing the language with an ‘informational implication’—in doing so a link is also made to the work of (Buszkowski 2021) on the Lambek Calculus

Hierarchies of modal and temporal logics with reference pointers

. We introduce and study hierarchies of extensions of the propositional modal and temporal languages with pairs of new syntactic devices: "point of reference --- reference pointer" which enable semantic references to be made within a formula. We propose three different but equivalent semantics for the extended languages, discuss and compare their expressiveness. The languages with reference pointers are shown to have great expressive power (especially when their frugal syntax is taken into account), perspicuous semantics, and simple deductive systems. For instance, Kamp's and Stavi's temporal operators, as well as nominals (names, clock variables), are definable in them. The universal validity in these languages is proved undecidable. The basic modal and temporal logics with reference pointers are uniformly axiomatized and strong completeness theorem is proved for them and extended to some classes of their extensions. Key words: Modal and Temporal Logics, Reference Pointers, Expressi..

Completeness for Flat Modal Fixpoint Logics

This paper exhibits a general and uniform method to prove completeness for certain modal fixpoint logics. Given a set \Gamma of modal formulas of the form \gamma(x, p1, . . ., pn), where x occurs only positively in \gamma, the language L\sharp (\Gamma) is obtained by adding to the language of polymodal logic a connective \sharp\_\gamma for each \gamma \epsilon. The term \sharp\_\gamma (\varphi1, . . ., \varphin) is meant to be interpreted as the least fixed point of the functional interpretation of the term \gamma(x, \varphi 1, . . ., \varphi n). We consider the following problem: given \Gamma, construct an axiom system which is sound and complete with respect to the concrete interpretation of the language L\sharp (\Gamma) on Kripke frames. We prove two results that solve this problem. First, let K\sharp (\Gamma) be the logic obtained from the basic polymodal K by adding a Kozen-Park style fixpoint axiom and a least fixpoint rule, for each fixpoint connective \sharp\_\gamma. Provided that each indexing formula \gamma satisfies the syntactic criterion of being untied in x, we prove this axiom system to be complete. Second, addressing the general case, we prove the soundness and completeness of an extension K+ (\Gamma) of K\_\sharp (\Gamma). This extension is obtained via an effective procedure that, given an indexing formula \gamma as input, returns a finite set of axioms and derivation rules for \sharp\_\gamma, of size bounded by the length of \gamma. Thus the axiom system K+ (\Gamma) is finite whenever \Gamma is finite

Compositional verification and specification of refinement for reactive systems in a dense time temporal logic

Dissertation zur Erlangung des Doktorgrades der Technischen Fakultat der Christian-Albrechts-Universitat zu Kiel. Originally available in German?This thesis introduces a compostitional dense time temporal logic for the compositions and refinement of reactive systems. A reactive system is specified by a pair consisting of a machine and a condition on the computations of this machine. In order to compose reactive systems, each step in a computation has additionally composition information such as “this is a system step”, or “this is an environment step” or “this is a communication step”. By defining a merge operator that merges two steps into one step compostionality is achieved. Because a dense time temporal logic is used refinement can be expressed easily in this logic. Existing proof rules for refinement are reformulated in our formalism. The notion of relative refinement is introduced to handle refinement of systems that only under certain conditions are considered to be correct refinements. The proof rules for “normal” refinement are extended to handle relative refinement of systems. Relative refinement is used to formalize Dijkstra’s development strategy for the solution of the readers/writers problem and to formalize a development strategy for certain fault tolerant systems. This development strategy is applied to the development of a fault tolerant storage system

Insights into Modal Slash Logic and Modal Decidability

The present paper has a two-fold task. On the one hand, it aims to provide an overview on Independence friendly modal logic as defined in (Tulenheimo, 2003; Tulenheimo, 2004) and studied in a number of subsequent publications. For systematic reasons to be explained, the logic is here referred to as modal slash logic (MsL). On the other hand, we take a close look at a syntactic fragment of MsL, to be termed MsL0, first formulated in (Tulenheimo and Sevenster, 2006). We push the study of this logic deeper at several points: a model-theoretic criterion is presented which serves to tell when a formula of MsL0 is not truth-equivalent to any formula of basic modal logic (ML); the game-theoretic property of ‘bounded quasi-positionality' of MsL0 is studied in detail; an alternative syntax for MsL0 is discerned and the logic obtained is shown to enjoy the property of quasi-locality (generalizing the notion of locality familiar from ML); and we formulate an asymmetric bisimulation concept and use it to prove that MsL0 is not closed under complementation. Drawing from insights provided by the study of MsL0, we conclude by general observations about claims made on the ‘reasons' why various modal logics are computationally well-behaved

Logical models for bounded reasoners

This dissertation aims at the logical modelling of aspects of human reasoning, informed by facts on the bounds of human cognition. We break down this challenge into three parts. In Part I, we discuss the place of logical systems for knowledge and belief in the Rationality Debate and we argue for systems that formalize an alternative picture of rationality -- one wherein empirical facts have a key role (Chapter 2). In Part II, we design logical models that encode explicitly the deductive reasoning of a single bounded agent and the variety of processes underlying it. This is achieved through the introduction of a dynamic, resource-sensitive, impossible-worlds semantics (Chapter 3). We then show that this type of semantics can be combined with plausibility models (Chapter 4) and that it can be instrumental in modelling the logical aspects of System 1 (“fast”) and System 2 (“slow”) cognitive processes (Chapter 5). In Part III, we move from single- to multi-agent frameworks. This unfolds in three directions: (a) the formation of beliefs about others (e.g. due to observation, memory, and communication), (b) the manipulation of beliefs (e.g. via acts of reasoning about oneself and others), and (c) the effect of the above on group reasoning. These questions are addressed, respectively, in Chapters 6, 7, and 8. We finally discuss directions for future work and we reflect on the contribution of the thesis as a whole (Chapter 9)