19 research outputs found
Zero-one laws with respect to models of provability logic and two Grzegorczyk logics
It has been shown in the late 1960s that each formula of first-order logic without constants and function symbols obeys a zero-one law: As the number of elements of finite models increases, every formula holds either in almost all or in almost no models of that size. Therefore, many properties of models, such as having an even number of elements, cannot be expressed in the language of first-order logic. Halpern and Kapron proved zero-one laws for classes of models corresponding to the modal logics K, T, S4, and S5 and for frames corresponding to S4 and S5. In this paper, we prove zero-one laws for provability logic and its two siblings Grzegorczyk logic and weak Grzegorczyk logic, with respect to model validity. Moreover, we axiomatize validity in almost all relevant finite models, leading to three different axiom systems
Stone-Type Dualities for Separation Logics
Stone-type duality theorems, which relate algebraic and
relational/topological models, are important tools in logic because -- in
addition to elegant abstraction -- they strengthen soundness and completeness
to a categorical equivalence, yielding a framework through which both algebraic
and topological methods can be brought to bear on a logic. We give a systematic
treatment of Stone-type duality for the structures that interpret bunched
logics, starting with the weakest systems, recovering the familiar BI and
Boolean BI (BBI), and extending to both classical and intuitionistic Separation
Logic. We demonstrate the uniformity and modularity of this analysis by
additionally capturing the bunched logics obtained by extending BI and BBI with
modalities and multiplicative connectives corresponding to disjunction,
negation and falsum. This includes the logic of separating modalities (LSM), De
Morgan BI (DMBI), Classical BI (CBI), and the sub-classical family of logics
extending Bi-intuitionistic (B)BI (Bi(B)BI). We additionally obtain as
corollaries soundness and completeness theorems for the specific Kripke-style
models of these logics as presented in the literature: for DMBI, the
sub-classical logics extending BiBI and a new bunched logic, Concurrent Kleene
BI (connecting our work to Concurrent Separation Logic), this is the first time
soundness and completeness theorems have been proved. We thus obtain a
comprehensive semantic account of the multiplicative variants of all standard
propositional connectives in the bunched logic setting. This approach
synthesises a variety of techniques from modal, substructural and categorical
logic and contextualizes the "resource semantics" interpretation underpinning
Separation Logic amongst them
Ruitenburg's Theorem mechanized and contextualized
In 1984, Wim Ruitenburg published a surprising result about periodic
sequences in intuitionistic propositional calculus (IPC). The property
established by Ruitenburg naturally generalizes local finiteness
(intuitionistic logic is not locally finite, even in a single variable).
However, one of the two main goals of this note is to illustrate that most
"natural" non-classical logics failing local finiteness also do not enjoy the
periodic sequence property; IPC is quite unique in separating these properties.
The other goal of this note is to present a Coq formalization of Ruitenburg's
heavily syntactic proof. Apart from ensuring its correctness, the formalization
allows extraction of a program providing a certified implementation of
Ruitenburg's algorithm.Comment: This note has been prepared for the informal (pre-)proceedings of
FICS 2024. The version to be submitted to the post-proceedings volume is
going to be significantly different, focusing on the Coq formalization, as
requested by referees and the P
Complete Additivity and Modal Incompleteness
In this paper, we tell a story about incompleteness in modal logic. The story
weaves together a paper of van Benthem, `Syntactic aspects of modal
incompleteness theorems,' and a longstanding open question: whether every
normal modal logic can be characterized by a class of completely additive modal
algebras, or as we call them, V-BAOs. Using a first-order reformulation of the
property of complete additivity, we prove that the modal logic that starred in
van Benthem's paper resolves the open question in the negative. In addition,
for the case of bimodal logic, we show that there is a naturally occurring
logic that is incomplete with respect to V-BAOs, namely the provability logic
GLB. We also show that even logics that are unsound with respect to such
algebras do not have to be more complex than the classical propositional
calculus. On the other hand, we observe that it is undecidable whether a
syntactically defined logic is V-complete. After these results, we generalize
the Blok Dichotomy to degrees of V-incompleteness. In the end, we return to van
Benthem's theme of syntactic aspects of modal incompleteness
A new calculus for intuitionistic Strong L\"ob logic: strong termination and cut-elimination, formalised
We provide a new sequent calculus that enjoys syntactic cut-elimination and
strongly terminating backward proof search for the intuitionistic Strong L\"ob
logic , an intuitionistic modal logic with a provability
interpretation. A novel measure on sequents is used to prove both the
termination of the naive backward proof search strategy, and the admissibility
of cut in a syntactic and direct way, leading to a straightforward
cut-elimination procedure. All proofs have been formalised in the interactive
theorem prover Coq.Comment: 21-page conference paper + 4-page appendix with proof
Bunched logics: a uniform approach
Bunched logics have found themselves to be key tools in modern computer science, in particular through the industrial-level program verification formalism Separation Logic. Despite this—and in contrast to adjacent families of logics like modal and substructural logic—there is a lack of uniform methodology in their study, leaving many evident variants uninvestigated and many open problems unresolved. In this thesis we investigate the family of bunched logics—including previously unexplored intuitionistic variants—through two uniform frameworks. The first is a system of duality theorems that relate the algebraic and Kripke-style interpretations of the logics; the second, a modular framework of tableaux calculi that are sound and complete for both the core logics themselves, as well as many classes of bunched logic model important for applications in program verification and systems modelling. In doing so we are able to resolve a number of open problems in the literature, including soundness and completeness theorems for intuitionistic variants of bunched logics, classes of Separation Logic models and layered graph models; decidability of layered graph logics; a characterisation theorem for the classes of bunched logic model definable by bunched logic formulae; and the failure of Craig interpolation for principal bunched logics. We also extend our duality theorems to the categorical structures suitable for interpreting predicate versions of the logics, in particular hyperdoctrinal structures used frequently in Separation Logic
Through and beyond classicality: analyticity, embeddings, infinity
Structural proof theory deals with formal representation of proofs and with the investigation of their properties. This thesis provides an analysis of various non-classical logical systems using proof-theoretic methods. The approach consists in the formulation of analytic calculi for these logics which are then used in order to study their metalogical properties. A specific attention is devoted to studying the connections between classical and non-classical reasoning. In particular, the use of analytic sequent calculi allows one to regain desirable structural properties which are lost in non-classical contexts. In this sense, proof-theoretic versions of embeddings between non-classical logics - both finitary and infinitary - prove to be a useful tool insofar as they build a bridge between different logical regions