9 research outputs found
Characterizing Quantifier Extensions of Dependence Logic
We characterize the expressive power of extensions of Dependence Logic and
Independence Logic by monotone generalized quantifiers in terms of quantifier
extensions of existential second-order logic.Comment: 9 page
Team Semantics and Recursive Enumerability
It is well known that dependence logic captures the complexity class NP, and
it has recently been shown that inclusion logic captures P on ordered models.
These results demonstrate that team semantics offers interesting new
possibilities for descriptive complexity theory. In order to properly
understand the connection between team semantics and descriptive complexity, we
introduce an extension D* of dependence logic that can define exactly all
recursively enumerable classes of finite models. Thus D* provides an approach
to computation alternative to Turing machines. The essential novel feature in
D* is an operator that can extend the domain of the considered model by a
finite number of fresh elements. Due to the close relationship between
generalized quantifiers and oracles, we also investigate generalized
quantifiers in team semantics. We show that monotone quantifiers of type (1)
can be canonically eliminated from quantifier extensions of first-order logic
by introducing corresponding generalized dependence atoms
Dependence Logic with Generalized Quantifiers: Axiomatizations
We prove two completeness results, one for the extension of dependence logic
by a monotone generalized quantifier Q with weak interpretation, weak in the
meaning that the interpretation of Q varies with the structures. The second
result considers the extension of dependence logic where Q is interpreted as
"there exists uncountable many." Both of the axiomatizations are shown to be
sound and complete for FO(Q) consequences.Comment: 17 page
The Doxastic Interpretation of Team Semantics
We advance a doxastic interpretation for many of the logical connectives
considered in Dependence Logic and in its extensions, and we argue that Team
Semantics is a natural framework for reasoning about beliefs and belief
updates