scholarly journals Inference in action

2007 ◽  
pp. 3-16 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benthem van
Keyword(s):  
Classical Logic ◽  
Recent Trend ◽  
Dynamic Logic ◽  
Substructural Logics ◽  
Representation Theorems ◽  
Cross Model ◽  
Structural Rules ◽  
Generalized Inference ◽  
Information Update ◽  
Dynamic Logics

Substructural logics arise whenever classical logic is put to new uses, and logicians from Serbia have been in the fore-front here. In this paper, we join the substructural tradition with another recent trend, viz. dynamic logic of information update. We show how these two approaches fit together in particular, through a number of representation theorems concerning structural rules. The proper background for these results turn out to be modal and dynamic logics of cross-model relations. We connect this finding with recent accounts of generalized inference, interpolation, and preservation results.

Multiplicative conjunction and an algebraic meaning of contraction and weakening

1998 ◽  
Vol 63 (3) ◽  
pp. 831-859 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Avron
Keyword(s):  
Classical Logic ◽  
Linear Logic ◽  
Substructural Logics ◽  
Interesting Property ◽  
Relevance Logic ◽  
Proper Subset ◽  
Algebraic Structures ◽  
Elimination Rule ◽  
First Case ◽  
Soundness And Completeness

AbstractWe show that the elimination rule for the multiplicative (or intensional) conjunction Λ is admissible in many important multiplicative substructural logics. These include LLm (the multiplicative fragment of Linear Logic) and RMIm (the system obtained from LLm by adding the contraction axiom and its converse, the mingle axiom.) An exception is Rm (the intensional fragment of the relevance logic R, which is LLm together with the contraction axiom). Let SLLm and SRm be, respectively, the systems which are obtained from LLm and Rm by adding this rule as a new rule of inference. The set of theorems of SRm is a proper extension of that of Rm, but a proper subset of the set of theorems of RMIm. Hence it still has the variable-sharing property. SRm has also the interesting property that classical logic has a strong translation into it. We next introduce general algebraic structures, called strong multiplicative structures, and prove strong soundness and completeness of SLLm relative to them. We show that in the framework of these structures, the addition of the weakening axiom to SLLm corresponds to the condition that there will be exactly one designated element, while the addition of the contraction axiom corresponds to the condition that there will be exactly one nondesignated element (in the first case we get the system BCKm, in the second - the system SRm). Various other systems in which multiplicative conjunction functions as a true conjunction are studied, together with their algebraic counterparts.

scholarly journals Logical dynamics meets logical pluralism?

2008 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johan Van Benthem
Keyword(s):  
Classical Logic ◽  
Logical Pluralism ◽  
Structural Rules ◽  
Resultant Vector ◽  
Interacting Agents ◽  
Questions And Answers ◽  
General Feeling ◽  
Set Up ◽  
Logical Dynamics ◽  
General Communication

Where is logic heading today? There is a general feeling that the discipline is broadening its scope and agenda beyond classical foundational issues, and maybe even a concern that, like Stephen Leacock’s famous horseman, it is ‘riding off madly in all directions’. So, what is the resultant vector? There seem to be two broad answers in circulation today. One is logical pluralism, locating the new scope of logic in charting a wide variety of reasoning styles, often marked by non-classical structural rules of inference. This is the new program that I subscribed to in my work on sub-structural logics around 1990, and it is a powerful movement today. But gradually, I have changed my mind about the crux of what logic should become. I would now say that the main issue is not variety of reasoning styles and notions of consequence, but the variety of informational tasks performed by intelligent interacting agents, of which inference is only one among many, involving observation, memory, questions and answers, dialogue, or general communication. And logical systems should deal with a wide variety of these, making information-carrying events first-class citizens in their set-up. The purpose of this brief paper is to contrast and compare the two approaches, drawing freely on some insights from earlier published papers. In particular, I will argue that logical dynamics sets itself the more ambitious diagnostic goal of explaining why substructural phenomena occur, by ‘deconstructing’ them into classical logic plus an explicit account of the relevant informational events.

2-Exp Time lower bounds for propositional dynamic logics with intersection

2005 ◽  
Vol 70 (4) ◽  
pp. 1072-1086 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Lange ◽  
Carsten Lutz
Keyword(s):  
Lower Bound ◽  
Lower Bounds ◽  
Open Problem ◽  
Dynamic Logic ◽  
Propositional Dynamic Logic ◽  
Tree Structures ◽  
Exponential Time ◽  
Double Exponential ◽  
Test Operator ◽  
Dynamic Logics

AbstractIn 1984. Danecki proved that satisfiability in IPDL, i.e., Propositional Dynamic Logic (PDL) extended with an intersection operator on programs, is decidabie in deterministic double exponential time. Since then, the exact complexity of IPDL has remained an open problem: the best known lower bound was the ExpTime one stemming from plain PDL until, in 2004. the first author established ExpSpace-hardness. In this paper, we finally close the gap and prove that IPDL is hard for 2-ExpTime. thus 2-ExpTime-complete. We then sharpen our lower bound, showing that it even applies to IPDL without the test operator interpreted on tree structures.

scholarly journals Dynamic sequent calculus for the logic of Epistemic Actions and Knowledge

10.29007/mwpp ◽  
2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giuseppe Greco ◽  
Alexander Kurz ◽  
Alessandra Palmigiano
Keyword(s):  
Sequent Calculus ◽  
Relational Semantics ◽  
Sequent Calculi ◽  
Structural Rules ◽  
Epistemic Actions ◽  
Dynamic Logics ◽  
Display Calculi

We develop a family of display-style, cut-free sequent calculi for dynamic epistemic logics on both an intuitionistic and a classical base. Like the standard display calculi, these calculi are modular: just by modifying the structural rules according to Dosen’s principle, these calculi are generalizable both to different Dynamic Logics (Epistemic, Deontic, etc.) and to different propositional bases (Linear, Relevant, etc.). Moreover, the rules they feature agree with the standard relational semantics for dynamic epistemic logics.

Towards an algorithmic construction of cut-elimination procedures

2008 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 81-105 ◽  
Author(s):  
AGATA CIABATTONI ◽  
ALEXANDER LEITSCH
Keyword(s):  
Substructural Logics ◽  
Cut Elimination ◽  
Sequent Calculi ◽  
Structural Rules ◽  
Algorithmic Construction ◽  
Logical Rules

We investigate cut elimination in propositional substructural logics. The problem is to decide whether a given calculus admits (reductive) cut elimination. We show that for commutative single-conclusion sequent calculi containing generalised knotted structural rules and arbitrary logical rules the problem can be decided by resolution-based methods. A general cut-elimination proof for these calculi is also provided.

On the unification of classical, intuitionistic and affine logics

2018 ◽  
Vol 29 (8) ◽  
pp. 1177-1216
Author(s):  
CHUCK LIANG
Keyword(s):  
Intuitionistic Logic ◽  
Classical Logic ◽  
Sequent Calculus ◽  
Linear Logic ◽  
Kripke Semantics ◽  
Cut Elimination ◽  
Structural Rules ◽  
Phase Semantics ◽  
Intuitionistic Logics

This article presents a unified logic that combines classical logic, intuitionistic logic and affine linear logic (restricting contraction but not weakening). We show that this unification can be achieved semantically, syntactically and in the computational interpretation of proofs. It extends our previous work in combining classical and intuitionistic logics. Compared to linear logic, classical fragments of proofs are better isolated from non-classical fragments. We define a phase semantics for this logic that naturally extends the Kripke semantics of intuitionistic logic. We present a sequent calculus with novel structural rules, which entail a more elaborate procedure for cut elimination. Computationally, this system allows affine-linear interpretations of proofs to be combined with classical interpretations, such as the λμ calculus. We show how cut elimination must respect the boundaries between classical and non-classical modes of proof that correspond to delimited control effects.

Reasoning about Petri Nets: A Calculus Based on Resolution and Dynamic Logic

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-22
Author(s):  
Bruno Lopes ◽  
Cláudia Nalon ◽  
Edward Hermann Haeusler
Keyword(s):  
Normal Form ◽  
Petri Nets ◽  
Dynamic Logic ◽  
Concurrent Systems ◽  
Modal Logics ◽  
Inference Rules ◽  
Logical Language ◽  
Dynamic Logics

Petri Nets are a widely used formalism to deal with concurrent systems. Dynamic Logics (DLs) are a family of modal logics where each modality corresponds to a program. Petri-PDL is a logical language that combines these two approaches: it is a dynamic logic where programs are replaced by Petri Nets. In this work we present a clausal resolution-based calculus for Petri-PDL. Given a Petri-PDL formula, we show how to obtain its translation into a normal form to which a set of resolution-based inference rules are applied. We show that the resulting calculus is sound, complete, and terminating. Some examples of the application of the method are also given.

scholarly journals Pretopologies and completeness proofs

1995 ◽  
Vol 60 (3) ◽  
pp. 861-878 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giovanni Sambin
Keyword(s):  
Classical Logic ◽  
Sequent Calculus ◽  
Predicate Logic ◽  
Linear Logic ◽  
Double Negation ◽  
Open Problems ◽  
Completeness Proof ◽  
Structural Rules ◽  
First Order ◽  
Definition Of

Pretopologies were introduced in [S], and there shown to give a complete semantics for a propositional sequent calculus BL, here called basic linear logic, as well as for its extensions by structural rules, ex falso quodlibet or double negation. Immediately after Logic Colloquium '88, a conversation with Per Martin-Löf helped me to see how the pretopology semantics should be extended to predicate logic; the result now is a simple and fully constructive completeness proof for first order BL and virtually all its extensions, including the usual, or structured, intuitionistic and classical logic. Such a proof clearly illustrates the fact that stronger set-theoretic principles and classical metalogic are necessary only when completeness is sought with respect to a special class of models, such as the usual two-valued models.To make the paper self-contained, I briefly review in §1 the definition of pretopologies; §2 deals with syntax and §3 with semantics. The completeness proof in §4, though similar in structure, is sensibly simpler than that in [S], and this is why it is given in detail. In §5 it is shown how little is needed to obtain completeness for extensions of BL in the same language. Finally, in §6 connections with proofs with respect to more traditional semantics are briefly investigated, and some open problems are put forward.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document