The Incorrect Usage of Propositional Logic in Game Theory: The Case of Disproving Oneself

Recently, we had to realize that more and more game theoretical articles have been published in peer-reviewed journals with severe logical deficiencies. In particular, we observed that the indirect proof was not applied correctly. These authors confuse between statements of propositional logic. They apply an indirect proof while assuming a prerequisite in order to get a contradiction. For instance, to find out that "if A then B" is valid, they suppose that the assumptions "A and not B" are valid to derive a contradiction in order to deduce "if A then B". Hence, they want to establish the equivalent proposition "A and not B implies A and not A" to conclude that "if A then B" is valid. In fact, they prove that a truth implies a falsehood, which is a wrong statement. As a consequence, "if A then B" is invalid, disproving their own results. We present and discuss some selected cases from the literature with severe logical flaws, invalidating the articles.Comment: 16 pages, 2 table

Propositional logic with short-circuit evaluation: a non-commutative and a commutative variant

Short-circuit evaluation denotes the semantics of propositional connectives in which the second argument is evaluated only if the first argument does not suffice to determine the value of the expression. Short-circuit evaluation is widely used in programming, with sequential conjunction and disjunction as primitive connectives. We study the question which logical laws axiomatize short-circuit evaluation under the following assumptions: compound statements are evaluated from left to right, each atom (propositional variable) evaluates to either true or false, and atomic evaluations can cause a side effect. The answer to this question depends on the kind of atomic side effects that can occur and leads to different "short-circuit logics". The basic case is FSCL (free short-circuit logic), which characterizes the setting in which each atomic evaluation can cause a side effect. We recall some main results and then relate FSCL to MSCL (memorizing short-circuit logic), where in the evaluation of a compound statement, the first evaluation result of each atom is memorized. MSCL can be seen as a sequential variant of propositional logic: atomic evaluations cannot cause a side effect and the sequential connectives are not commutative. Then we relate MSCL to SSCL (static short-circuit logic), the variant of propositional logic that prescribes short-circuit evaluation with commutative sequential connectives. We present evaluation trees as an intuitive semantics for short-circuit evaluation, and simple equational axiomatizations for the short-circuit logics mentioned that use negation and the sequential connectives only.Comment: 34 pages, 6 tables. Considerable parts of the text below stem from arXiv:1206.1936, arXiv:1010.3674, and arXiv:1707.05718. Together with arXiv:1707.05718, this paper subsumes most of arXiv:1010.367

A Canonical Model for Interactive Unawareness

Heifetz, Meier and Schipper (2005) introduced a generalized state-space model that allows for non-trivial unawareness among several individuals and strong properties of knowledge. We show that this generalized state-space model arises naturally if states consist of maximally consistent sets of formulas in an appropriate logical formulation.unawareness, awareness, knowledge, interactive epistemology, modal logic, lack of conception, bounded perception

Bipolarity and multipolarity in aggregation structures

C

Internal Calculi for Separation Logics

We present a general approach to axiomatise separation logics with heaplet semantics with no external features such as nominals/labels. To start with, we design the first (internal) Hilbert-style axiomatisation for the quantifier-free separation logic SL(?, -*). We instantiate the method by introducing a new separation logic with essential features: it is equipped with the separating conjunction, the predicate ls, and a natural guarded form of first-order quantification. We apply our approach for its axiomatisation. As a by-product of our method, we also establish the exact expressive power of this new logic and we show PSpace-completeness of its satisfiability problem

Grounding the Unreal

The scientific successes of the last 400 years strongly suggest a picture on which our scientific theories exhibit a layered structure of dependence and determination. Economics is dependent on and determined by psychology; psychology in its turn is, plausibly, dependent on and determined by biology; and so it goes. It is tempting to explain this layered structure of dependence and determination among our theories by appeal to a corresponding layered structure of dependence and determination among the entities putatively treated by those theories. In this paper, I argue that we can resist this temptation: we can explain the sense in which, e.g., the biological truths are dependent on and determined by chemical truths without appealing to properly biological or chemical entities. This opens the door to a view on which, though there are more truths than just the purely physical truths, there are no entities, states, or properties other than the purely physical entities, states, and properties. I argue that some familiar strategies to explicate the idea of a layered structure of theories by appeal to reduction, ground, and truthmaking encounter difficulties. I then show how these difficulties point the way to a more satisfactory treatment which appeals to something very close to the notion of ground. Finally, I show how this treatment provides a theoretical setting in which we might fruitfully frame debates about which entities there really are

Security Theorems via Model Theory

A model-theoretic approach can establish security theorems for cryptographic protocols. Formulas expressing authentication and non-disclosure properties of protocols have a special form. They are quantified implications for all xs . (phi implies for some ys . psi). Models (interpretations) for these formulas are *skeletons*, partially ordered structures consisting of a number of local protocol behaviors. Realized skeletons contain enough local sessions to explain all the behavior, when combined with some possible adversary behaviors. We show two results. (1) If phi is the antecedent of a security goal, then there is a skeleton A_phi such that, for every skeleton B, phi is satisfied in B iff there is a homomorphism from A_phi to B. (2) A protocol enforces for all xs . (phi implies for some ys . psi) iff every realized homomorphic image of A_phi satisfies psi. Hence, to verify a security goal, one can use the Cryptographic Protocol Shapes Analyzer CPSA (TACAS, 2007) to identify minimal realized skeletons, or "shapes," that are homomorphic images of A_phi. If psi holds in each of these shapes, then the goal holds

The Lambek calculus with iteration: two variants

Formulae of the Lambek calculus are constructed using three binary connectives, multiplication and two divisions. We extend it using a unary connective, positive Kleene iteration. For this new operation, following its natural interpretation, we present two lines of calculi. The first one is a fragment of infinitary action logic and includes an omega-rule for introducing iteration to the antecedent. We also consider a version with infinite (but finitely branching) derivations and prove equivalence of these two versions. In Kleene algebras, this line of calculi corresponds to the *-continuous case. For the second line, we restrict our infinite derivations to cyclic (regular) ones. We show that this system is equivalent to a variant of action logic that corresponds to general residuated Kleene algebras, not necessarily *-continuous. Finally, we show that, in contrast with the case without division operations (considered by Kozen), the first system is strictly stronger than the second one. To prove this, we use a complexity argument. Namely, we show, using methods of Buszkowski and Palka, that the first system is $\Pi_1^0$-hard, and therefore is not recursively enumerable and cannot be described by a calculus with finite derivations

The Ontological Import of Adding Proper Classes

In this article, we analyse the ontological import of adding classes to set theories. We assume that this increment is well represented by going from ZF system to NBG. We thus consider the standard techniques of reducing one system to the other. Novak proved that from a model of ZF we can build a model of NBG (and vice versa), while Shoenfield have shown that from a proof in NBG of a set-sentence we can generate a proof in ZF of the same formula. We argue that the first makes use of a too strong metatheory. Although meaningful, this symmetrical reduction does not equate the ontological content of the theories. The strong metatheory levels the two theories. Moreover, we will modernize Shoenfields proof, emphasizing its relation to Herbrands theorem and that it can only be seen as a partial type of reduction. In contrast with symmetrical reductions, we believe that asymmetrical relations are powerful tools for comparing ontological content. In virtue of this, we prove that there is no interpretation of NBG in ZF, while NBG trivially interprets ZF. This challenges the standard view that the two systems have the same ontological content