A presentation of Quantum Logic based on an "and then" connective

When a physicist performs a quantic measurement, new information about the system at hand is gathered. This paper studies the logical properties of how this new information is combined with previous information. It presents Quantum Logic as a propositional logic under two connectives: negation and the "and then" operation that combines old and new information. The "and then" connective is neither commutative nor associative. Many properties of this logic are exhibited, and some small elegant subset is shown to imply all the properties considered. No independence or completeness result is claimed. Classical physical systems are exactly characterized by the commutativity, the associativity, or the monotonicity of the "and then" connective. Entailment is defined in this logic and can be proved to be a partial order. In orthomodular lattices, the operation proposed by Finch (1969) satisfies all the properties studied in this paper. All properties satisfied by Finch's operation in modular lattices are valid in Hilbert Space Quantum Logic. It is not known whether all properties of Hilbert Space Quantum Logic are satisfied by Finch's operation in modular lattices. Non-commutative, non-associative algebraic structures generalizing Boolean algebras are defined, ideals are characterized and a homomorphism theorem is proved.Comment: 28 pages. Submitte

Avoiding deontic explosion by contextually restricting aggregation

In this paper, we present an adaptive logic for deontic conflicts, called P2.1(r), that is based on Goble's logic SDLaPe-a bimodal extension of Goble's logic P that invalidates aggregation for all prima facie obligations. The logic P2.1(r) has several advantages with respect to SDLaPe. For consistent sets of obligations it yields the same results as Standard Deontic Logic and for inconsistent sets of obligations, it validates aggregation "as much as possible". It thus leads to a richer consequence set than SDLaPe. The logic P2.1(r) avoids Goble's criticisms against other non-adjunctive systems of deontic logic. Moreover, it can handle all the 'toy examples' from the literature as well as more complex ones

A KLM Perspective on Defeasible Reasoning for Description Logics

In this paper we present an approach to defeasible reasoning for the description logic ALC. The results discussed here are based on work done by Kraus, Lehmann and Magidor (KLM) on defeasible conditionals in the propositional case. We consider versions of a preferential semantics for two forms of defeasible subsumption, and link these semantic constructions formally to KLM-style syntactic properties via representation results. In addition to showing that the semantics is appropriate, these results pave the way for more effective decision procedures for defeasible reasoning in description logics. With the semantics of the defeasible version of ALC in place, we turn to the investigation of an appropriate form of defeasible entailment for this enriched version of ALC. This investigation includes an algorithm for the computation of a form of defeasible entailment known as rational closure in the propositional case. Importantly, the algorithm relies completely on classical entailment checks and shows that the computational complexity of reasoning over defeasible ontologies is no worse than that of the underlying classical ALC. Before concluding, we take a brief tour of some existing work on defeasible extensions of ALC that go beyond defeasible subsumption

OWL and Rules

The relationship between the Web Ontology Language OWL and rule-based formalisms has been the subject of many discussions and research investigations, some of them controversial. From the many attempts to reconcile the two paradigms, we present some of the newest developments. More precisely, we show which kind of rules can be modeled in the current version of OWL, and we show how OWL can be extended to incorporate rules. We finally give references to a large body of work on rules and OWL