scholarly journals Relevant logic and relation algebras

10.29007/8gj7 ◽  
2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tomasz Kowalski
Keyword(s):  
Positive Result ◽  
Relevant Logic ◽  
Relation Algebras ◽  
Subdirectly Irreducible ◽  
Finitely Based ◽  
Relevant Logics ◽  
Associative Relation ◽  
Representable Relation

In 2007, Maddux observed that certain classes of representable relationalgebras (RRAs) form sound semantics for some relevant logics. In particular,(a) RRAs of transitive relations are sound for R, and (b) RRAs of transitive,dense relations are sound for RM. He asked whether they were complete aswell. Later that year I proved a modest positive result in a similar direction,namely that weakly associative relation algebras, a class (much) larger thanRRA, is sound and complete for positive relevant logic B. In 2008, Mikulas proved anegative result: that RRAs of transitive relations are not complete for R.His proof is indirect: he shows that the quasivariety of appropriatereducts of transitive RRAs is not finitely based. Later Maddux re-establishedthe result in a more direct way. In 2010, Maddux proved a contrasting positive result: that transitive, dense RRAs are complete for RM. He found an embedding of Sugihara algebras into transitive, dense RRAs. I will show that if we give up the requirement of representability, the positive result holds for R as well. To be precise, the following theorem holds.Theorem. Every normal subdirectly irreducible De Morgan monoid in the languagewithout Ackermann constant can be embedded into a square-increasing relationalgebra. Therefore, the variety of such algebras is sound and complete for R.

scholarly journals Boolean negation and non-conservativity II: The variable-sharing property

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tore Fjetland Øgaard
Keyword(s):  
Classical Logic ◽  
Relevant Logic ◽  
Relevant Logics ◽  
Acute Form ◽  
Vast Range ◽  
Boolean Extension

Abstract Many relevant logics are conservatively extended by Boolean negation. Not all, however. This paper shows an acute form of non-conservativeness, namely that the Boolean-free fragment of the Boolean extension of a relevant logic need not always satisfy the variable-sharing property. In fact, it is shown that such an extension can in fact yield classical logic. For a vast range of relevant logic, however, it is shown that the variable-sharing property, restricted to the Boolean-free fragment, still holds for the Boolean extended logic.

Non-finite-axiomatizability results in algebraic logic

1992 ◽  
Vol 57 (3) ◽  
pp. 832-843 ◽  
Author(s):  
Balázs Biró
Keyword(s):  
Algebraic Logic ◽  
Relation Algebra ◽  
Equational Theory ◽  
Negative Answer ◽  
Relation Algebras ◽  
Representable Relation Algebra ◽  
Finite Set ◽  
Variable Symbol ◽  
Axiom Systems ◽  
Representable Relation

This paper deals with relation, cylindric and polyadic equality algebras. First of all it addresses a problem of B. Jónsson. He asked whether relation set algebras can be expanded by finitely many new operations in a “reasonable” way so that the class of these expansions would possess a finite equational base. The present paper gives a negative answer to this problem: Our main theorem states that whenever Rs+ is a class that consists of expansions of relation set algebras such that each operation of Rs+ is logical in Jónsson's sense, i.e., is the algebraic counterpart of some (derived) connective of first-order logic, then the equational theory of Rs+ has no finite axiom systems. Similar results are stated for the other classes mentioned above. As a corollary to this theorem we can solve a problem of Tarski and Givant [87], Namely, we claim that the valid formulas of certain languages cannot be axiomatized by a finite set of logical axiom schemes. At the same time we give a negative solution for a version of a problem of Henkin and Monk [74] (cf. also Monk [70] and Németi [89]).Throughout we use the terminology, notation and results of Henkin, Monk, Tarski [71] and [85]. We also use results of Maddux [89a].Notation. RA denotes the class of relation algebras, Rs denotes the class of relation set algebras and RRA is the class of representable relation algebras, i.e. the class of subdirect products of relation set algebras. The symbols RA, Rs and RRA abbreviate also the expressions relation algebra, relation set algebra and representable relation algebra, respectively.For any class C of similar algebras EqC is the set of identities that hold in C, while Eq1C is the set of those identities in EqC that contain at most one variable symbol. (We note that Henkin et al. [85] uses the symbol EqC in another sense.)

scholarly journals On representable relation algebras.

1964 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 207-210 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald Monk
Keyword(s):  
Relation Algebras ◽  
Representable Relation

scholarly journals The variety of semirings generated by distributive lattices and finite fields

2014 ◽  
Vol 95 (109) ◽  
pp. 101-109
Author(s):  
Yong Shao ◽  
Sinisa Crvenkovic ◽  
Melanija Mitrovic
Keyword(s):  
Finite Number ◽  
Distributive Lattice ◽  
Finite Fields ◽  
Distributive Lattices ◽  
Main Role ◽  
Subdirectly Irreducible ◽  
Finitely Based

A semiring variety is d-semisimple if it is generated by the distributive lattice of order two and a finite number of finite fields. A d-semisimple variety V = HSP{B2, F1,..., Fk} plays the main role in this paper. It will be proved that it is finitely based, and that, up to isomorphism, the two-element distributive lattice B2 and all subfields of F1,..., Fk are the only subdirectly irreducible members in it.

scholarly journals Boolean negation and non-conservativity I: Relevant modal logics

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tore Fjetland Øgaard
Keyword(s):  
Relevant Logic ◽  
Modal Logics ◽  
Modal Operator ◽  
Relevant Logics ◽  
Theoretic Proof

Abstract Many relevant logics can be conservatively extended by Boolean negation. Mares showed, however, that E is a notable exception. Mares’ proof is by and large a rather involved model-theoretic one. This paper presents a much easier proof-theoretic proof which not only covers E but also generalizes so as to also cover relevant logics with a primitive modal operator added. It is shown that from even very weak relevant logics augmented by a weak K-ish modal operator, and up to the strong relevant logic R with a S5 modal operator, all fail to be conservatively extended by Boolean negation. The proof, therefore, also covers Meyer and Mares’ proof that NR—R with a primitive S4-modality added—also fails to be conservatively extended by Boolean negation.

Amalgamation in relation algebras

1998 ◽  
Vol 63 (2) ◽  
pp. 479-484 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maarten Marx
Keyword(s):  
Modal Logic ◽  
Equational Theory ◽  
Weak Form ◽  
Boolean Algebras ◽  
The Other ◽  
Relation Algebras ◽  
Boolean Algebras With Operators ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Arrow Logic ◽  
Representable Relation

We investigate amalgamation properties of relational type algebras. Besides purely algebraic interest, amalgamation in a class of algebras is important because it leads to interpolation results for the logic corresponding to that class (cf. [15]). The multi-modal logic corresponding to relational type algebras became known under the name of “arrow logic” (cf. [18, 17]), and has been studied rather extensively lately (cf. [10]). Our research was inspired by the following result of Andréka et al. [1].Let K be a class of relational type algebras such that(i) composition is associative,(ii) K is a class of boolean algebras with operators, and(iii) K contains the representable relation algebras RRA.Then the equational theory of K is undecidable.On the other hand, there are several classes of relational type algebras (e.g., NA, WA denned below) whose equational (even universal) theories are decidable (cf. [13]). Composition is not associative in these classes. Theorem 5 indicates that also with respect to amalgamation (a very weak form of) associativity forms a borderline. We first recall the relevant definitions.

scholarly journals A non-transitive relevant implication corresponding to classical logic consequence

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 10
Author(s):  
Peter Verdée ◽  
Inge De Bal ◽  
Aleksandra Samonek
Keyword(s):  
Classical Logic ◽  
Sequent Calculus ◽  
Modus Ponens ◽  
Relevant Logic ◽  
Object Language ◽  
Cut Rule ◽  
Consequence Relation ◽  
Relevant Implication ◽  
Relevant Logics ◽  
Traditional Sense

In this paper we first develop a logic independent account of relevant implication. We propose a stipulative denition of what it means for a multiset of premises to relevantly L-imply a multiset of conclusions, where L is a Tarskian consequence relation: the premises relevantly imply the conclusions iff there is an abstraction of the pair <premises, conclusions> such that the abstracted premises L-imply the abstracted conclusions and none of the abstracted premises or the abstracted conclusions can be omitted while still maintaining valid L-consequence.          Subsequently we apply this denition to the classical logic (CL) consequence relation to obtain NTR-consequence, i.e. the relevant CL-consequence relation in our sense, and develop a sequent calculus that is sound and complete with regard to relevant CL-consequence. We present a sound and complete sequent calculus for NTR. In a next step we add rules for an object language relevant implication to thesequent calculus. The object language implication reflects exactly the NTR-consequence relation. One can see the resulting logic NTR-> as a relevant logic in the traditional sense of the word.       By means of a translation to the relevant logic R, we show that the presented logic NTR is very close to relevance logics in the Anderson-Belnap-Dunn-Routley-Meyer tradition. However, unlike usual relevant logics, NTR is decidable for the full language, Disjunctive Syllogism (A and ~AvB relevantly imply B) and Adjunction (A and B relevantly imply A&B) are valid, and neither Modus Ponens nor the Cut rule are admissible.

scholarly journals Arithmetic Formulated Relevantly

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (5) ◽  
pp. 154-288
Author(s):  
Robert Meyer
Keyword(s):  
Intuitionistic Logic ◽  
Natural Deduction ◽  
Relevant Logic ◽  
Peano Arithmetic ◽  
Critical Problem ◽  
First Order ◽  
Order Form ◽  
Relevant Implication ◽  
Relevant Logics ◽  
Natural Way

The purpose of this paper is to formulate first-order Peano arithmetic within the resources of relevant logic, and to demonstrate certain properties of the system thus formulated. Striking among these properties are the facts that (1) it is trivial that relevant arithmetic is absolutely consistent, but (2) classical first-order Peano arithmetic is straightforwardly contained in relevant arithmetic. Under (1), I shall show in particular that 0 = 1 is a non-theorem of relevant arithmetic; this, of course, is exactly the formula whose unprovability was sought in the Hilbert program for proving arithmetic consistent. Under (2), I shall exhibit the requisite translation, drawing some Goedelian conclusions therefrom. Left open, however, is the critical problem whether Ackermann’s rule γ is admissible for theories of relevant arithmetic. The particular system of relevant Peano arithmetic featured in this paper shall be called R♯. Its logical base shall be the system R of relevant implication, taken in its first-order form RQ. Among other Peano arithmetics we shall consider here in particular the systems C♯, J♯, and RM3♯; these are based respectively on the classical logic C, the intuitionistic logic J, and the Sobocinski-Dunn semi-relevant logic RM3. And another feature of the paper will be the presentation of a system of natural deduction for R♯, along lines valid for first-order relevant theories in general. This formulation of R♯ makes it possible to construct relevantly valid arithmetical deductions in an easy and natural way; it is based on, but is in some respects more convenient than, the natural deduction formulations for relevant logics developed by Anderson and Belnap in Entailment.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document