12 research outputs found

    Interplays of knowledge and non-contingency

    Get PDF
    This paper combines a non-contingency logic with an epistemic logic by means of fusions and products of modal systems. Some consequences of these interplays are pointed out

    Neighbourhood contingency bisimulation

    Get PDF
    We introduce a notion of bisimulation for contingency logic interpreted on neighbourhood structures, characterise this logic as bisimulation-invariant fragment of modal logic and of first-order logic, and compare it with existing notions in the literature

    S5-Style Non-Standard Modalities in a Hypersequent Framework

    Get PDF
    The aim of the paper is to present some non-standard modalities (such as non-contingency, contingency, essence and accident) based on S5-models in a framework of cut-free hypersequent calculi. We also study negated modalities, i.e. negated necessity and negated possibility, which produce paraconsistent and paracomplete negations respectively. As a basis for our calculi, we use Restall's cut-free hypersequent calculus for S5. We modify its rules for the above-mentioned modalities and prove strong soundness and completeness theorems by a Hintikka-style argument. As a consequence, we obtain a cut admissibility theorem. Finally, we present a constructive syntactic proof of cut elimination theorem

    Knowledge and ignorance in Belnap--Dunn logic

    Full text link
    In this paper, we argue that the usual approach to modelling knowledge and belief with the necessity modality □\Box does not produce intuitive outcomes in the framework of the Belnap--Dunn logic (BD\mathsf{BD}, alias FDE\mathsf{FDE} -- first-degree entailment). We then motivate and introduce a non\-standard modality ■\blacksquare that formalises knowledge and belief in BD\mathsf{BD} and use ■\blacksquare to define ∙\bullet and ▼\blacktriangledown that formalise the \emph{unknown truth} and ignorance as \emph{not knowing whether}, respectively. Moreover, we introduce another modality I\mathbf{I} that stands for \emph{factive ignorance} and show its connection with ■\blacksquare. We equip these modalities with Kripke-frame-based semantics and construct a sound and complete analytic cut system for BD■\mathsf{BD}^\blacksquare and BDI\mathsf{BD}^\mathbf{I} -- the expansions of BD\mathsf{BD} with ■\blacksquare and I\mathbf{I}. In addition, we show that □\Box as it is customarily defined in BD\mathsf{BD} cannot define any of the introduced modalities, nor, conversely, neither ■\blacksquare nor I\mathbf{I} can define □\Box. We also demonstrate that ■\blacksquare and I\mathbf{I} are not interdefinable and establish the definability of several important classes of frames using ■\blacksquare

    Achieving while maintaining:A logic of knowing how with intermediate constraints

    Get PDF
    In this paper, we propose a ternary knowing how operator to express that the agent knows how to achieve ϕ\phi given ψ\psi while maintaining χ\chi in-between. It generalizes the logic of goal-directed knowing how proposed by Yanjing Wang 2015 'A logic of knowing how'. We give a sound and complete axiomatization of this logic.Comment: appear in Proceedings of ICLA 201
    corecore