AGM-Like Paraconsistent Belief Change

Two systems of belief change based on paraconsistent logics are introduced in this article by means of AGM-like postulates. The first one, AGMp, is defined over any paraconsistent logic which extends classical logic such that the law of excluded middle holds w.r.t. the paraconsistent negation. The second one, AGMo , is specifically designed for paraconsistent logics known as Logics of Formal Inconsistency (LFIs), which have a formal consistency operator that allows to recover all the classical inferences. Besides the three usual operations over belief sets, namely expansion, contraction and revision (which is obtained from contraction by the Levi identity), the underlying paraconsistent logic allows us to define additional operations involving (non-explosive) contradictions. Thus, it is defined external revision (which is obtained from contraction by the reverse Levi identity), consolidation and semi-revision, all of them over belief sets. It is worth noting that the latter operations, introduced by S. Hansson, involve the temporary acceptance of contradictory beliefs, and so they were originally defined only for belief bases. Unlike to previous proposals in the literature, only defined for specific paraconsistent logics, the present approach can be applied to a general class of paraconsistent logics which are supraclassical, thus preserving the spirit of AGM. Moreover, representation theorems w.r.t. constructions based on selection functions are obtained for all the operations

A Generalisation of a Refutation-related Method in Paraconsistent Logics

This article describes a refutation method of proving maximality of three-valued paraconsistent logics. After outlining the philosophical background related to paraconsistent logics and the refutation approach to modern logic, we briefly describe how these two areas meet in the case of maximal paraconsistent logics. We focus on a method of proving maximality introduced in [34] and [37] that has the benefit of being simple and effective. We show how the method works on a number of examples, thus emphasising the fact that it provides a unifying approach to the search for maximal paraconsistent logics. Finally, we show how the method can be generalised to cover a wide range of paraconsistent logics. We also conduct a small experimental setting that confirms the theoretical results

Jaśkowski's criterion and three-valued paraconsistent logics

A survey is given of three-valued paraconsistent propositional logics connected with Jaśkowski’s criterion for constructing paraconsistent logics. Several problems are raised and four new matrix three-valued paraconsistent logics are suggested

Towards an efficient prover for the C1 paraconsistent logic

The KE inference system is a tableau method developed by Marco Mondadori which was presented as an improvement, in the computational efficiency sense, over Analytic Tableaux. In the literature, there is no description of a theorem prover based on the KE method for the C1 paraconsistent logic. Paraconsistent logics have several applications, such as in robot control and medicine. These applications could benefit from the existence of such a prover. We present a sound and complete KE system for C1, an informal specification of a strategy for the C1 prover as well as problem families that can be used to evaluate provers for C1. The C1 KE system and the strategy described in this paper will be used to implement a KE based prover for C1, which will be useful for those who study and apply paraconsistent logics.Comment: 16 page

Paracomplete logics which are dual to the paraconsistent logics L3A and L3B

In 2016 Beziau, introduce a more restricted concept of paraconsistency, namely the genuine paraconsistency. He calls genuine paraconsistent logic those logic rejecting φ, ¬φ |- ψ and |- ¬(φ ∧ ¬φ). In that paper the author analyzes, among the three-valued logics, which of these logics satisfy this property. If we consider multiple-conclusion consequence relations, the dual properties of those above mentioned are: |- φ, ¬φ, and ¬(ψ ∨ ¬ψ) |- . We call genuine paracomplete logics those rejecting the mentioned properties. We present here an analysis of the three-valued genuine paracomplete logics