Modal Logics with Hard Diamond-free Fragments

We investigate the complexity of modal satisfiability for certain combinations of modal logics. In particular we examine four examples of multimodal logics with dependencies and demonstrate that even if we restrict our inputs to diamond-free formulas (in negation normal form), these logics still have a high complexity. This result illustrates that having D as one or more of the combined logics, as well as the interdependencies among logics can be important sources of complexity even in the absence of diamonds and even when at the same time in our formulas we allow only one propositional variable. We then further investigate and characterize the complexity of the diamond-free, 1-variable fragments of multimodal logics in a general setting.Comment: New version: improvements and corrections according to reviewers' comments. Accepted at LFCS 201

The evolution of complex gene regulation by low specificity binding sites

Transcription factor binding sites vary in their specificity, both within and between species. Binding specificity has a strong impact on the evolution of gene expression, because it determines how easily regulatory interactions are gained and lost. Nevertheless, we have a relatively poor understanding of what evolutionary forces determine the specificity of binding sites. Here we address this question by studying regulatory modules composed of multiple binding sites. Using a population-genetic model, we show that more complex regulatory modules, composed of a greater number of binding sites, must employ binding sites that are individually less specific, compared to less complex regulatory modules. This effect is extremely general, and it hold regardless of the regulatory logic of a module. We attribute this phenomenon to the inability of stabilising selection to maintain highly specific sites in large regulatory modules. Our analysis helps to explain broad empirical trends in the yeast regulatory network: those genes with a greater number of transcriptional regulators feature by less specific binding sites, and there is less variance in their specificity, compared to genes with fewer regulators. Likewise, our results also help to explain the well-known trend towards lower specificity in the transcription factor binding sites of higher eukaryotes, which perform complex regulatory tasks, compared to prokaryotes

NEXP-completeness and Universal Hardness Results for Justification Logic

We provide a lower complexity bound for the satisfiability problem of a multi-agent justification logic, establishing that the general NEXP upper bound from our previous work is tight. We then use a simple modification of the corresponding reduction to prove that satisfiability for all multi-agent justification logics from there is hard for the Sigma 2 p class of the second level of the polynomial hierarchy - given certain reasonable conditions. Our methods improve on these required conditions for the same lower bound for the single-agent justification logics, proven by Buss and Kuznets in 2009, thus answering one of their open questions.Comment: Shorter version has been accepted for publication by CSR 201

Reasoning about Minimal Belief and Negation as Failure

We investigate the problem of reasoning in the propositional fragment of MBNF, the logic of minimal belief and negation as failure introduced by Lifschitz, which can be considered as a unifying framework for several nonmonotonic formalisms, including default logic, autoepistemic logic, circumscription, epistemic queries, and logic programming. We characterize the complexity and provide algorithms for reasoning in propositional MBNF. In particular, we show that entailment in propositional MBNF lies at the third level of the polynomial hierarchy, hence it is harder than reasoning in all the above mentioned propositional formalisms for nonmonotonic reasoning. We also prove the exact correspondence between negation as failure in MBNF and negative introspection in Moore's autoepistemic logic

Axiomatizability of propositionally quantified modal logics on relational frames

Propositional modal logic over relational frames is naturally extended with propositional quantifiers by letting them range over arbitrary sets of worlds of the relevant frame. This is also known as second-order propositional modal logic. The propositionally quantified modal logic of a class of relational frames is often not axiomatizable, although there are known exceptions, most notably the case of frames validating the strong modal logic S5 . Here, we develop new general methods with which many of the open questions in this area can be answered. We illustrate the usefulness of these methods by applying them to a range of examples, which provide a detailed picture of which normal modal logics define classes of relational frames whose propositionally quantified modal logic is axiomatizable. We also apply these methods to establish new results in the multimodal case

A Fibred Tableau Calculus for Modal Logics of Agents

In previous works we showed how to combine propositional multimodal logics using Gabbay's \emph{fibring} methodology. In this paper we extend the above mentioned works by providing a tableau-based proof technique for the combined/fibred logics. To achieve this end we first make a comparison between two types of tableau proof systems, (\emph{graph} $\&$ \emph{path}), with the help of a scenario (The Friend's Puzzle). Having done that we show how to uniformly construct a tableau calculus for the combined logic using Governatori's labelled tableau system \KEM. We conclude with a discussion on \KEM's features

Lewis meets Brouwer: constructive strict implication

C. I. Lewis invented modern modal logic as a theory of "strict implication". Over the classical propositional calculus one can as well work with the unary box connective. Intuitionistically, however, the strict implication has greater expressive power than the box and allows to make distinctions invisible in the ordinary syntax. In particular, the logic determined by the most popular semantics of intuitionistic K becomes a proper extension of the minimal normal logic of the binary connective. Even an extension of this minimal logic with the "strength" axiom, classically near-trivial, preserves the distinction between the binary and the unary setting. In fact, this distinction and the strong constructive strict implication itself has been also discovered by the functional programming community in their study of "arrows" as contrasted with "idioms". Our particular focus is on arithmetical interpretations of the intuitionistic strict implication in terms of preservativity in extensions of Heyting's Arithmetic.Comment: Our invited contribution to the collection "L.E.J. Brouwer, 50 years later