Algebraic Semantics for Quasi-Nelson Logic

Author(s):  
Fei Liang ◽  
Thiago Nascimento
Author(s):  
Thiago Nascimento ◽  
Umberto Rivieccio ◽  
João Marcos ◽  
Matthew Spinks

Abstract Besides the better-known Nelson logic ($\mathcal{N}3$) and paraconsistent Nelson logic ($\mathcal{N}4$), in 1959 David Nelson introduced, with motivations of realizability and constructibility, a logic called $\mathcal{S}$. The logic $\mathcal{S}$ was originally presented by means of a calculus (crucially lacking the contraction rule) with infinitely many rule schemata and no semantics (other than the intended interpretation into Arithmetic). We look here at the propositional fragment of $\mathcal{S}$, showing that it is algebraizable (in fact, implicative), in the sense of Blok and Pigozzi, with respect to a variety of three-potent involutive residuated lattices. We thus introduce the first known algebraic semantics for $\mathcal{S}$ as well as a finite Hilbert-style calculus equivalent to Nelson’s presentation; this also allows us to clarify the relation between $\mathcal{S}$ and the other two Nelson logics $\mathcal{N}3$ and $\mathcal{N}4$.


10.29007/p4ch ◽  
2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ramon Jansana ◽  
Umberto Rivieccio

N4-lattices are the algebraic semantics of paraconsistent Nelson logic, which was introduced as an inconsistency-tolerant counterpart of the better-known logic of Nelson. Paraconsistent Nelson logic combines interesting features of intuitionistic, classical and many-valued logics (e.g., Belnap-Dunn four-valued logic); recent work has shown that it can also be seen as one member of the wide family of substructural logics.The work we present here is a contribution towards a better topological understanding of the algebraic counterpart of paraconsistent Nelson logic, namely a variety of involutive lattices called N4-lattices.


Author(s):  
Lucas Champollion

Why can I tell you that I ran for five minutes but not that I *ran all the way to the store for five minutes? Why can you say that there are five pounds of books in this package if it contains several books, but not *five pounds of book if it contains only one? What keeps you from using *sixty degrees of water to tell me the temperature of the water in your pool when you can use sixty inches of water to tell me its height? And what goes wrong when I complain that *all the ants in my kitchen are numerous? The constraints on these constructions involve concepts that are generally studied separately: aspect, plural and mass reference, measurement, and distributivity. This work provides a unified perspective on these domains, connects them formally within the framework of algebraic semantics and mereology, and uses this connection to transfer insights across unrelated bodies of literature and formulate a single constraint that explains each of the judgments above. This provides a starting point from which various linguistic applications of mereology are developed and explored. The main foundational issues, relevant data, and choice points are introduced in an accessible format.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ivan Chajda ◽  
Helmut Länger

AbstractTogether with J. Paseka we introduced so-called sectionally pseudocomplemented lattices and posets and illuminated their role in algebraic constructions. We believe that—similar to relatively pseudocomplemented lattices—these structures can serve as an algebraic semantics of certain intuitionistic logics. The aim of the present paper is to define congruences and filters in these structures, derive mutual relationships between them and describe basic properties of congruences in strongly sectionally pseudocomplemented posets. For the description of filters in both sectionally pseudocomplemented lattices and posets, we use the tools introduced by A. Ursini, i.e., ideal terms and the closedness with respect to them. It seems to be of some interest that a similar machinery can be applied also for strongly sectionally pseudocomplemented posets in spite of the fact that the corresponding ideal terms are not everywhere defined.


2010 ◽  
Vol 180 (8) ◽  
pp. 1354-1372 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carles Noguera ◽  
Francesc Esteva ◽  
Lluís Godo

SIMULATION ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 84 (7) ◽  
pp. 339-358 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pieter J.L. Cuijpers ◽  
Jan F. Broenink ◽  
Pieter J. Mosterman

2000 ◽  
Vol 65 (2) ◽  
pp. 481-518 ◽  
Author(s):  
Josep Maria Font ◽  
Miquel Rius

AbstractThis paper contains a joint study of two sentential logics that combine a many-valued character, namely tetravalence, with a modal character; one of them is normal and the other one quasinormal. The method is to study their algebraic counterparts and their abstract models with the tools of Abstract Algebraic Logic, and particularly with those of Brown and Suszko's theory of abstract logics as recently developed by Font and Jansana in their “A General Algebraic Semantics for Sentential Logics”. The logics studied here arise from the algebraic and lattice-theoretical properties we review of Tetravalent Modal Algebras, a class of algebras studied mainly by Loureiro, and also by Figallo. Landini and Ziliani, at the suggestion of the late Antonio Monteiro.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document