Local Sentences and Mahlo Cardinals

Local sentences were introduced by J.-P. Ressayre who proved certain remarkable stretching theorems establishing the equivalence between the existence of finite models for these sentences and the existence of some infinite well ordered models. Two of these stretching theorems were only proved under certain large cardinal axioms but the question of their exact (consistency) strength was left open in [O. Finkel and J.-P. Ressayre, Stretchings, Journal of Symbolic Logic, Volume 61 (2), 1996, p. 563-585 ]. Here, we solve this problem, using a combinatorial result of J. H. Schmerl. In fact, we show that the stretching principles are equivalent to the existence of n-Mahlo cardinals for appropriate integers n. This is done by proving first that for each integer n, there is a local sentence phi_n which has well ordered models of order type alpha, for every infinite ordinal alpha > omega which is not an n-Mahlo cardinal

Initial Semantics for Strengthened Signatures

We give a new general definition of arity, yielding the companion notions of signature and associated syntax. This setting is modular in the sense requested by Ghani and Uustalu: merging two extensions of syntax corresponds to building an amalgamated sum. These signatures are too general in the sense that we are not able to prove the existence of an associated syntax in this general context. So we have to select arities and signatures for which there exists the desired initial monad. For this, we follow a track opened by Matthes and Uustalu: we introduce a notion of strengthened arity and prove that the corresponding signatures have initial semantics (i.e. associated syntax). Our strengthened arities admit colimits, which allows the treatment of the \lambda-calculus with explicit substitution.Comment: In Proceedings FICS 2012, arXiv:1202.317

Automatic Generation of Proof Tactics for Finite-Valued Logics

A number of flexible tactic-based logical frameworks are nowadays available that can implement a wide range of mathematical theories using a common higher-order metalanguage. Used as proof assistants, one of the advantages of such powerful systems resides in their responsiveness to extensibility of their reasoning capabilities, being designed over rule-based programming languages that allow the user to build her own `programs to construct proofs' - the so-called proof tactics. The present contribution discusses the implementation of an algorithm that generates sound and complete tableau systems for a very inclusive class of sufficiently expressive finite-valued propositional logics, and then illustrates some of the challenges and difficulties related to the algorithmic formation of automated theorem proving tactics for such logics. The procedure on whose implementation we will report is based on a generalized notion of analyticity of proof systems that is intended to guarantee termination of the corresponding automated tactics on what concerns theoremhood in our targeted logics

Uncertainty About Evidence

We develop a logical framework for reasoning about knowledge and evidence in which the agent may be uncertain about how to interpret their evidence. Rather than representing an evidential state as a fixed subset of the state space, our models allow the set of possible worlds that a piece of evidence corresponds to to vary from one possible world to another, and therefore itself be the subject of uncertainty. Such structures can be viewed as (epistemically motivated) generalizations of topological spaces. In this context, there arises a natural distinction between what is actually entailed by the evidence and what the agent knows is entailed by the evidence -- with the latter, in general, being much weaker. We provide a sound and complete axiomatization of the corresponding bi-modal logic of knowledge and evidence entailment, and investigate some natural extensions of this core system, including the addition of a belief modality and its interaction with evidence interpretation and entailment, and the addition of a "knowability" modality interpreted via a (generalized) interior operator.Comment: In Proceedings TARK 2019, arXiv:1907.0833