Positive Logic with Adjoint Modalities: Proof Theory, Semantics and Reasoning about Information

We consider a simple modal logic whose non-modal part has conjunction and disjunction as connectives and whose modalities come in adjoint pairs, but are not in general closure operators. Despite absence of negation and implication, and of axioms corresponding to the characteristic axioms of (e.g.) T, S4 and S5, such logics are useful, as shown in previous work by Baltag, Coecke and the first author, for encoding and reasoning about information and misinformation in multi-agent systems. For such a logic we present an algebraic semantics, using lattices with agent-indexed families of adjoint pairs of operators, and a cut-free sequent calculus. The calculus exploits operators on sequents, in the style of "nested" or "tree-sequent" calculi; cut-admissibility is shown by constructive syntactic methods. The applicability of the logic is illustrated by reasoning about the muddy children puzzle, for which the calculus is augmented with extra rules to express the facts of the muddy children scenario.Comment: This paper is the full version of the article that is to appear in the ENTCS proceedings of the 25th conference on the Mathematical Foundations of Programming Semantics (MFPS), April 2009, University of Oxfor

Algorithmic correspondence and completeness in modal logic. I. The core algorithm SQEMA

Modal formulae express monadic second-order properties on Kripke frames, but in many important cases these have first-order equivalents. Computing such equivalents is important for both logical and computational reasons. On the other hand, canonicity of modal formulae is important, too, because it implies frame-completeness of logics axiomatized with canonical formulae. Computing a first-order equivalent of a modal formula amounts to elimination of second-order quantifiers. Two algorithms have been developed for second-order quantifier elimination: SCAN, based on constraint resolution, and DLS, based on a logical equivalence established by Ackermann. In this paper we introduce a new algorithm, SQEMA, for computing first-order equivalents (using a modal version of Ackermann's lemma) and, moreover, for proving canonicity of modal formulae. Unlike SCAN and DLS, it works directly on modal formulae, thus avoiding Skolemization and the subsequent problem of unskolemization. We present the core algorithm and illustrate it with some examples. We then prove its correctness and the canonicity of all formulae on which the algorithm succeeds. We show that it succeeds not only on all Sahlqvist formulae, but also on the larger class of inductive formulae, introduced in our earlier papers. Thus, we develop a purely algorithmic approach to proving canonical completeness in modal logic and, in particular, establish one of the most general completeness results in modal logic so far.Comment: 26 pages, no figures, to appear in the Logical Methods in Computer Scienc

Changing a semantics: opportunism or courage?

The generalized models for higher-order logics introduced by Leon Henkin, and their multiple offspring over the years, have become a standard tool in many areas of logic. Even so, discussion has persisted about their technical status, and perhaps even their conceptual legitimacy. This paper gives a systematic view of generalized model techniques, discusses what they mean in mathematical and philosophical terms, and presents a few technical themes and results about their role in algebraic representation, calibrating provability, lowering complexity, understanding fixed-point logics, and achieving set-theoretic absoluteness. We also show how thinking about Henkin's approach to semantics of logical systems in this generality can yield new results, dispelling the impression of adhocness. This paper is dedicated to Leon Henkin, a deep logician who has changed the way we all work, while also being an always open, modest, and encouraging colleague and friend.Comment: 27 pages. To appear in: The life and work of Leon Henkin: Essays on his contributions (Studies in Universal Logic) eds: Manzano, M., Sain, I. and Alonso, E., 201

Classical BI: Its Semantics and Proof Theory

We present Classical BI (CBI), a new addition to the family of bunched logics which originates in O'Hearn and Pym's logic of bunched implications BI. CBI differs from existing bunched logics in that its multiplicative connectives behave classically rather than intuitionistically (including in particular a multiplicative version of classical negation). At the semantic level, CBI-formulas have the normal bunched logic reading as declarative statements about resources, but its resource models necessarily feature more structure than those for other bunched logics; principally, they satisfy the requirement that every resource has a unique dual. At the proof-theoretic level, a very natural formalism for CBI is provided by a display calculus \`a la Belnap, which can be seen as a generalisation of the bunched sequent calculus for BI. In this paper we formulate the aforementioned model theory and proof theory for CBI, and prove some fundamental results about the logic, most notably completeness of the proof theory with respect to the semantics.Comment: 42 pages, 8 figure

Characterizing perfect recall using next-step temporal operators in S5 and sub-S5 Epistemic Temporal Logic

We review the notion of perfect recall in the literature on interpreted systems, game theory, and epistemic logic. In the context of Epistemic Temporal Logic (ETL), we give a (to our knowledge) novel frame condition for perfect recall, which is local and can straightforwardly be translated to a defining formula in a language that only has next-step temporal operators. This frame condition also gives rise to a complete axiomatization for S5 ETL frames with perfect recall. We then consider how to extend and consolidate the notion of perfect recall in sub-S5 settings, where the various notions discussed are no longer equivalent