The representation of Takeuti's\begin{array}{*{20}c} \parallel \\ \_ \\ \end{array} -operator

Gaisi Takeuti has recently proposed a new operation on orthomodular latticesL, \(\begin{array}{*{20}c} \parallel \\ \_ \\ \end{array} \) :P(L)»L. The properties of \(\begin{array}{*{20}c} \parallel \\ \_ \\ \end{array} \) suggest that the value of \(\begin{array}{*{20}c} \parallel \\ \_ \\ \end{array} \) (A) (A) \( \subseteq \) L) corresponds to the degree in which the elements ofA behave classically. To make this idea precise, we investigate the connection between structural properties of orthomodular latticesL and the existence of two-valued homomorphisms onL.     

Algebraic Functions

Let A be an algebra. We say that the functions f ₁, . . . , f _m : A ⁿ ?? A are algebraic on A provided there is a finite system of term-equalities ${{\bigwedge t_{k}(\overline{x}, \overline{z}) = s_{k}(\overline{x}, \overline{z})}}$ satisfying that for each ${{\overline{a} \in A^{n}}}$ , the m-tuple ${{(f_{1}(\overline{a}), \ldots , f_{m}(\overline{a}))}}$ is the unique solution in A ^m to the system ${{\bigwedge t_{k}(\overline{a}, \overline{z}) = s_{k}(\overline{a}, \overline{z})}}$ . In this work we present a collection of general tools for the study of algebraic functions, and apply them to obtain characterizations for algebraic functions on distributive lattices, Stone algebras, finite abelian groups and vector spaces, among other well known algebraic structures.     

Bohrification of operator algebras and quantum logic

Following Birkhoff and von Neumann, quantum logic has traditionally been based on the lattice of closed linear subspaces of some Hilbert space, or, more generally, on the lattice of projections in a von Neumann algebra A. Unfortunately, the logical interpretation of these lattices is impaired by their nondistributivity and by various other problems. We show that a possible resolution of these difficulties, suggested by the ideas of Bohr, emerges if instead of single projections one considers elementary propositions to be families of projections indexed by a partially ordered set ${\mathcal{C}(A)}$ of appropriate commutative subalgebras of A. In fact, to achieve both maximal generality and ease of use within topos theory, we assume that A is a so-called Rickart C*-algebra and that ${\mathcal{C}(A)}$ consists of all unital commutative Rickart C*-subalgebras of A. Such families of projections form a Heyting algebra in a natural way, so that the associated propositional logic is intuitionistic: distributivity is recovered at the expense of the law of the excluded middle. Subsequently, generalizing an earlier computation for n × n matrices, we prove that the Heyting algebra thus associated to A arises as a basis for the internal Gelfand spectrum (in the sense of Banaschewski?CMulvey) of the ??Bohrification?? ${\underline A}$ of A, which is a commutative Rickart C*-algebra in the topos of functors from ${\mathcal{C}A}$ to the category of sets. We explain the relationship of this construction to partial Boolean algebras and Bruns?CLakser completions. Finally, we establish a connection between probability measures on the lattice of projections on a Hilbert space H and probability valuations on the internal Gelfand spectrum of ${\underline A}$ for A?=?B(H).     

On Birkhoff’s Common Abstraction Problem

In his milestone textbook Lattice Theory, Garrett Birkhoff challenged his readers to develop a ??common abstraction?? that includes Boolean algebras and latticeordered groups as special cases. In this paper, after reviewing the past attempts to solve the problem, we provide our own answer by selecting as common generalization of ${\mathcal{B} \mathcal{A}}$ and ${\mathcal{L} \mathcal{G}}$ their join ${\mathcal{B} \mathcal{A} \vee \mathcal{L} \mathcal{G}}$ in the lattice of subvarieties of ${\mathcal{F} \mathcal{L}}$ (the variety of FL-algebras); we argue that such a solution is optimal under several respects and we give an explicit equational basis for ${\mathcal{B} \mathcal{A} \vee \mathcal{L} \mathcal{G}}$ relative to ${\mathcal{F} \mathcal{L}}$ . Finally, we prove a Holland-type representation theorem for a variety of FL-algebras containing ${\mathcal{B} \mathcal{A} \vee \mathcal{L} \mathcal{G}}$ .     

Indistinguishability, Choices, and Logics of Agency

This paper deals with structures ${\langle{\bf T}, I\rangle}$ in which T is a tree and I is a function assigning each moment a partition of the set of histories passing through it. The function I is called indistinguishability and generalizes the notion of undividedness. Belnap’s choices are particular indistinguishability functions. Structures ${\langle{\bf T}, I\rangle}$ provide a semantics for a language ${\mathcal{L}}$ with tense and modal operators. The first part of the paper investigates the set-theoretical properties of the set of indistinguishability classes, which has a tree structure. The significant relations between this tree and T are established within a general theory of trees. The aim of second part is testing the expressive power of the language ${\mathcal{L}}$ . The natural environment for this kind of investigations is Belnap’s seeing to it that (stit). It will be proved that the hybrid extension of ${\mathcal{L}}$ (with a simultaneity operator) is suitable for expressing stit concepts in a purely temporal language.     

Actuality in Propositional Modal Logic

We show that the actuality operator A is redundant in any propositional modal logic characterized by a class of Kripke models (respectively, neighborhood models). Specifically, we prove that for every formula ${\phi}$ in the propositional modal language with A, there is a formula ${\psi}$ not containing A such that ${\phi}$ and ${\psi}$ are materially equivalent at the actual world in every Kripke model (respectively, neighborhood model). Inspection of the proofs leads to corresponding proof-theoretic results concerning the eliminability of the actuality operator in the actuality extension of any normal propositional modal logic and of any “classical” modal logic. As an application, we provide an alternative proof of a result of Williamson’s to the effect that the compound operator A□ behaves, in any normal logic between T and S5, like the simple necessity operator □ in S5.     

Dependence and Independence

We introduce an atomic formula ${\vec{y} \bot_{\vec{x}}\vec{z}}$ intuitively saying that the variables ${\vec{y}}$ are independent from the variables ${\vec{z}}$ if the variables ${\vec{x}}$ are kept constant. We contrast this with dependence logic ${\mathcal{D}}$ based on the atomic formula = ${(\vec{x}, \vec{y})}$ , actually equivalent to ${\vec{y} \bot_{\vec{x}}\vec{y}}$ , saying that the variables ${\vec{y}}$ are totally determined by the variables ${\vec{x}}$ . We show that ${\vec{y} \bot_{\vec{x}}\vec{z}}$ gives rise to a natural logic capable of formalizing basic intuitions about independence and dependence. We show that ${\vec{y} \bot_{\vec{x}}\vec{z}}$ can be used to give partially ordered quantifiers and IF-logic an alternative interpretation without some of the shortcomings related to so called signaling that interpretations using = ${(\vec{x}, \vec{y})}$ have.     

Finite axiomatization for some intermediate logics

LetN. be the set of all natural numbers (except zero), and letD _n ^* = {k ∈N ∶k|n} ∪ {0} wherek¦n if and only ifn=k.x f or somex∈N. Then, an ordered setD _n ^* = 〈D _n ^* , ? _n , wherex? _ny iffx¦y for anyx, y∈D _n ^* , can easily be seen to be a pseudo-boolean algebra. In [5], V.A. Jankov has proved that the class of algebras {D _n ^* ∶n∈B}, whereB =,{k ∈N∶ ? \(\mathop \exists \limits_{n \in N} \) (n > 1 ≧n ² k)is finitely axiomatizable. The present paper aims at showing that the class of all algebras {D _n ^* ∶n∈B} is also finitely axiomatizable. First, we prove that an intermediate logic defined as follows: $$LD = Cn(INT \cup \{ p_3 \vee [p_3 \to (p_1 \to p_2 ) \vee (p_2 \to p_1 )]\} )$$ finitely approximatizable. Then, defining, after Kripke, a model as a non-empty ordered setH = 〈K, ?〉, and making use of the set of formulas true in this model, we show that any finite strongly compact pseudo-boolean algebra ? is identical with. the set of formulas true in the Kripke modelH _B = 〈P(?), ?〉 (whereP(?) stands for the family of all prime filters in the algebra ?). Furthermore, the concept of a structure of divisors is defined, and the structure is shown to beH D _n ^* = 〈P (D _n ^* ), ?〉for anyn∈N. Finally, it is proved that for any strongly compact pseudo-boolean algebraU satisfying the axiomp ₃∨ [p ₃→(p₁→p₂)∨(p₂→p₁)] there is a structure of divisorsD _* ⁿ such that it is possible to define a strong homomorphism froomiH D _n ^* ontoH D _U . Exploiting, among others, this property, it turns out to be relatively easy to show that \(LD = \mathop \cap \limits_{n \in N} E(\mathfrak{D}_n^* )\) .     

On a Definition of a Variety of Monadic ℓ-Groups

In this paper we expand previous results obtained in [2] about the study of categorical equivalence between the category IRL ₀ of integral residuated lattices with bottom, which generalize MV-algebras and a category whose objects are called c-differential residuated lattices. The equivalence is given by a functor ${{\mathsf{K}^\bullet}}$ , motivated by an old construction due to J. Kalman, which was studied by Cignoli in [3] in the context of Heyting and Nelson algebras. These results are then specialized to the case of MV-algebras and the corresponding category ${MV^{\bullet}}$ of monadic MV-algebras induced by “Kalman’s functor” ${\mathsf{K}^\bullet}$ . Moreover, we extend the construction to ?-groups introducing the new category of monadic ?-groups together with a functor ${\Gamma ^\sharp}$ , that is “parallel” to the well known functor ${\Gamma}$ between ? and MV-algebras.     

Frontal Operators in Weak Heyting Algebras

In this paper we shall introduce the variety FWHA of frontal weak Heyting algebras as a generalization of the frontal Heyting algebras introduced by Leo Esakia in [10]. A frontal operator in a weak Heyting algebra A is an expansive operator τ preserving finite meets which also satisfies the equation ${\tau(a) \leq b \vee (b \rightarrow a)}$ , for all ${a, b \in A}$ . These operators were studied from an algebraic, logical and topological point of view by Leo Esakia in [10]. We will study frontal operators in weak Heyting algebras and we will consider two examples of them. We will give a Priestley duality for the category of frontal weak Heyting algebras in terms of relational spaces ${\langle X, \leq, T, R \rangle}$ where ${\langle X, \leq, T \rangle}$ is a WH-space [6], and R is an additional binary relation used to interpret the modal operator. We will also study the WH-algebras with successor and the WH-algebras with gamma. For these varieties we will give two topological dualities. The first one is based on the representation given for the frontal weak Heyting algebras. The second one is based on certain particular classes of WH-spaces.     

Inverse Images of Box Formulas in Modal Logic

We investigate, for several modal logics but concentrating on KT, KD45, S4 and S5, the set of formulas B for which ${\square B}$ is provably equivalent to ${\square A}$ for a selected formula A (such as p, a sentence letter). In the exceptional case in which a modal logic is closed under the (‘cancellation’) rule taking us from ${\square C \leftrightarrow \square D}$ to ${C \leftrightarrow D}$ , there is only one formula B, to within equivalence, in this inverse image, as we shall call it, of ${\square A}$ (relative to the logic concerned); for logics for which the intended reading of “ ${\square}$ ” is epistemic or doxastic, failure to be closed under this rule indicates that from the proposition expressed by a knowledge- or belief-attribution, the propositional object of the attitude in question cannot be recovered: arguably, a somewhat disconcerting situation. More generally, the inverse image of ${\square A}$ may comprise a range of non-equivalent formulas, all those provably implied by one fixed formula and provably implying another—though we shall see that for several choices of logic and of the formula A, there is not even such an ‘interval characterization’ of the inverse image (of ${\square A}$ ) to be found.     

Decidability of the Equational Theory of the Continuous Geometry CG(\Bbb {F})

For $\Bbb {F}$ the field of real or complex numbers, let $CG(\Bbb {F})$ be the continuous geometry constructed by von Neumann as a limit of finite dimensional projective geometries over $\Bbb {F}$ . Our purpose here is to show the equational theory of $CG(\Bbb {F})$ is decidable.     

Disjunctions in closure spaces

The main result of this paper is the following theorem: a closure space X has an 〈α, δ, Q〉-regular base of the power \(\mathfrak{n}\) iff X is Q-embeddable in \(B_{\alpha ,\delta }^\mathfrak{n} \) It is a generalization of the following theorems:

1. Stone representation theorem for distributive lattices (α = 0, δ = ω, Q = ω),
2. universality of the Alexandroff's cube for T ₀-topological spaces (α = ω, δ = ∞, Q = 0),
3. universality of the closure space of filters in the lattice of all subsets for 〈α, δ〉-closure spaces (Q = 0).

By this theorem we obtain some characterizations of the closure space \(F_\mathfrak{m} \) given by the consequence operator for the classical propositional calculus over a formalized language of the zero order with the set of propositional variables of the power \(\mathfrak{m}\) . In particular we prove that a countable closure space X is embeddable with finite disjunctions preserved into F _ω iff X is a consistent closure space satisfying the compactness theorem and X contains a 〈0, ω〉-base consisting of ω-prime sets. This paper is a continuation of [7], [2] and [3].     

Propositional Reasoning that Tracks Probabilistic Reasoning

This paper concerns the extent to which uncertain propositional reasoning can track probabilistic reasoning, and addresses kinematic problems that extend the familiar Lottery paradox. An acceptance rule assigns to each Bayesian credal state p a propositional belief revision method ${\sf B}_{p}$ , which specifies an initial belief state ${\sf B}_{p}(\top)$ that is revised to the new propositional belief state ${\sf B}(E)$ upon receipt of information E. An acceptance rule tracks Bayesian conditioning when ${\sf B}_{p}(E) = {\sf B}_{p|_{E}}(\top)$ , for every E such that p(E)?>?0; namely, when acceptance by propositional belief revision equals Bayesian conditioning followed by acceptance. Standard proposals for uncertain acceptance and belief revision do not track Bayesian conditioning. The ??Lockean?? rule that accepts propositions above a probability threshold is subject to the familiar lottery paradox (Kyburg 1961), and we show that it is also subject to new and more stubborn paradoxes when the tracking property is taken into account. Moreover, we show that the familiar AGM approach to belief revision (Harper, Synthese 30(1?C2):221?C262, 1975; Alchourrón et al., J Symb Log 50:510?C530, 1985) cannot be realized in a sensible way by any uncertain acceptance rule that tracks Bayesian conditioning. Finally, we present a plausible, alternative approach that tracks Bayesian conditioning and avoids all of the paradoxes. It combines an odds-based acceptance rule proposed originally by Levi (1996) with a non-AGM belief revision method proposed originally by Shoham (1987).     

Turing–Taylor Expansions for Arithmetic Theories

Turing progressions have been often used to measure the proof-theoretic strength of mathematical theories: iterate adding consistency of some weak base theory until you “hit” the target theory. Turing progressions based on n-consistency give rise to a \({\Pi_{n+1}}\) proof-theoretic ordinal \({|U|_{\Pi^0_{n+1}}}\) also denoted \({|U|_n}\). As such, to each theory U we can assign the sequence of corresponding \({\Pi_{n+1}}\) ordinals \({\langle |U|_n\rangle_{n > 0}}\). We call this sequence a Turing-Taylor expansion or spectrum of a theory. In this paper, we relate Turing-Taylor expansions of sub-theories of Peano Arithmetic to Ignatiev’s universal model for the closed fragment of the polymodal provability logic \({\mathsf{GLP}_\omega}\). In particular, we observe that each point in the Ignatiev model can be seen as Turing-Taylor expansions of formal mathematical theories. Moreover, each sub-theory of Peano Arithmetic that allows for a Turing-Taylor expansion will define a unique point in Ignatiev’s model.     

What is Nominalistic Mereology?

Hybrid languages are introduced in order to evaluate the strength of “minimal” mereologies with relatively strong frame definability properties. Appealing to a robust form of nominalism, I claim that one investigated language $\mathcal {H}_{\textsf {m}}$ is maximally acceptable for nominalistic mereology. In an extension $\mathcal {H}_{\textsf {gem}}$ of $\mathcal {H}_{\textsf {m}}$ , a modal analog for the classical systems of Leonard and Goodman (J Symb Log 5:45–55, 1940) and Le?niewski (1916) is introduced and shown to be complete with respect to 0-deleted Boolean algebras. We characterize the formulas of first-order logic invariant for $\mathcal {H}_{\textsf {gem}}$ -bisimulations.