Modal Logics Definable by Universal Three-Variable Formulas

We consider the satisfiability problem for modal logic over classes of structures definable by universal first-order formulas with three variables. We exhibit a simple formula for which the problem is undecidable. This improves an earlier result in which nine variables were used. We also show that for classes defined by three-variable, universal Horn formulas the problem is decidable. This subsumes decidability results for many natural modal logics, including T, B, K4, S4, S5

Proving Craig and Lyndon Interpolation Using Labelled Sequent Calculi

We have recently presented a general method of proving the fundamental logical properties of Craig and Lyndon Interpolation (IPs) by induction on derivations in a wide class of internal sequent calculi, including sequents, hypersequents, and nested sequents. Here we adapt the method to a more general external formalism of labelled sequents and provide sufficient criteria on the Kripke-frame characterization of a logic that guarantee the IPs. In particular, we show that classes of frames definable by quantifier-free Horn formulas correspond to logics with the IPs. These criteria capture the modal cube and the infinite family of transitive Geach logics

Applications of Finite Model Theory: Optimisation Problems, Hybrid Modal Logics and Games.

There exists an interesting relationships between two seemingly distinct fields: logic from the field of Model Theory, which deals with the truth of statements about discrete structures; and Computational Complexity, which deals with the classification of problems by how much of a particular computer resource is required in order to compute a solution. This relationship is known as Descriptive Complexity and it is the primary application of the tools from Model Theory when they are restricted to the finite; this restriction is commonly called Finite Model Theory. In this thesis, we investigate the extension of the results of Descriptive Complexity from classes of decision problems to classes of optimisation problems. When dealing with decision problems the natural mapping from true and false in logic to yes and no instances of a problem is used but when dealing with optimisation problems, other features of a logic need to be used. We investigate what these features are and provide results in the form of logical frameworks that can be used for describing optimisation problems in particular classes, building on the existing research into this area. Another application of Finite Model Theory that this thesis investigates is the relative expressiveness of various fragments of an extension of modal logic called hybrid modal logic. This is achieved through taking the Ehrenfeucht-Fraïssé game from Model Theory and modifying it so that it can be applied to hybrid modal logic. Then, by developing winning strategies for the players in the game, results are obtained that show strict hierarchies of expressiveness for fragments of hybrid modal logic that are generated by varying the quantifier depth and the number of proposition and nominal symbols available

On Sub-Propositional Fragments of Modal Logic

In this paper, we consider the well-known modal logics $\mathbf{K}$, $\mathbf{T}$, $\mathbf{K4}$, and $\mathbf{S4}$, and we study some of their sub-propositional fragments, namely the classical Horn fragment, the Krom fragment, the so-called core fragment, defined as the intersection of the Horn and the Krom fragments, plus their sub-fragments obtained by limiting the use of boxes and diamonds in clauses. We focus, first, on the relative expressive power of such languages: we introduce a suitable measure of expressive power, and we obtain a complex hierarchy that encompasses all fragments of the considered logics. Then, after observing the low expressive power, in particular, of the Horn fragments without diamonds, we study the computational complexity of their satisfiability problem, proving that, in general, it becomes polynomial

Embedding Non-Ground Logic Programs into Autoepistemic Logic for Knowledge Base Combination

In the context of the Semantic Web, several approaches to the combination of ontologies, given in terms of theories of classical first-order logic and rule bases, have been proposed. They either cast rules into classical logic or limit the interaction between rules and ontologies. Autoepistemic logic (AEL) is an attractive formalism which allows to overcome these limitations, by serving as a uniform host language to embed ontologies and nonmonotonic logic programs into it. For the latter, so far only the propositional setting has been considered. In this paper, we present three embeddings of normal and three embeddings of disjunctive non-ground logic programs under the stable model semantics into first-order AEL. While the embeddings all correspond with respect to objective ground atoms, differences arise when considering non-atomic formulas and combinations with first-order theories. We compare the embeddings with respect to stable expansions and autoepistemic consequences, considering the embeddings by themselves, as well as combinations with classical theories. Our results reveal differences and correspondences of the embeddings and provide useful guidance in the choice of a particular embedding for knowledge combination.Comment: 52 pages, submitte

Complexity of Non-Monotonic Logics

Over the past few decades, non-monotonic reasoning has developed to be one of the most important topics in computational logic and artificial intelligence. Different ways to introduce non-monotonic aspects to classical logic have been considered, e.g., extension with default rules, extension with modal belief operators, or modification of the semantics. In this survey we consider a logical formalism from each of the above possibilities, namely Reiter's default logic, Moore's autoepistemic logic and McCarthy's circumscription. Additionally, we consider abduction, where one is not interested in inferences from a given knowledge base but in computing possible explanations for an observation with respect to a given knowledge base. Complexity results for different reasoning tasks for propositional variants of these logics have been studied already in the nineties. In recent years, however, a renewed interest in complexity issues can be observed. One current focal approach is to consider parameterized problems and identify reasonable parameters that allow for FPT algorithms. In another approach, the emphasis lies on identifying fragments, i.e., restriction of the logical language, that allow more efficient algorithms for the most important reasoning tasks. In this survey we focus on this second aspect. We describe complexity results for fragments of logical languages obtained by either restricting the allowed set of operators (e.g., forbidding negations one might consider only monotone formulae) or by considering only formulae in conjunctive normal form but with generalized clause types. The algorithmic problems we consider are suitable variants of satisfiability and implication in each of the logics, but also counting problems, where one is not only interested in the existence of certain objects (e.g., models of a formula) but asks for their number.Comment: To appear in Bulletin of the EATC