Paraconsistent logic from a modal viewpoint

In this paper we study paraconsistent negation as a modal operator, considering the fact that the classical negation of necessity has a paraconsistent behavior. We examine this operator on the one hand in the modal logic S5 and on the other hand in some new four-valued modal logics.     

An encompassing framework for Paraconsistent Logic Programs

We propose a framework which extends Antitonic Logic Programs [Damásio and Pereira, in: Proc. 6th Int. Conf. on Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning, Springer, 2001, p. 748] to an arbitrary complete bilattice of truth-values, where belief and doubt are explicitly represented. Inspired by Ginsberg and Fitting's bilattice approaches, this framework allows a precise definition of important operators found in logic programming, such as explicit and default negation. In particular, it leads to a natural semantical integration of explicit and default negation through the Coherence Principle [Pereira and Alferes, in: European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 1992, p. 102], according to which explicit negation entails default negation. We then define Coherent Answer Sets, and the Paraconsistent Well-founded Model semantics, generalizing many paraconsistent semantics for logic programs. In particular, Paraconsistent Well-Founded Semantics with eXplicit negation (WFSX_p) [Alferes et al., J. Automated Reas. 14 (1) (1995) 93–147; Damásio, PhD thesis, 1996]. The framework is an extension of Antitonic Logic Programs for most cases, and is general enough to capture Probabilistic Deductive Databases, Possibilistic Logic Programming, Hybrid Probabilistic Logic Programs, and Fuzzy Logic Programming. Thus, we have a powerful mathematical formalism for dealing simultaneously with default, paraconsistency, and uncertainty reasoning. Results are provided about how our semantical framework deals with inconsistent information and with its propagation by the rules of the program.     

The Undecidability of Propositional Adaptive Logic

We investigate and classify the notion of final derivability of two basic inconsistency-adaptive logics. Specifically, the maximal complexity of the set of final consequences of decidable sets of premises formulated in the language of propositional logic is described. Our results show that taking the consequences of a decidable propositional theory is a complicated operation. The set of final consequences according to either the Reliability Calculus or the Minimal Abnormality Calculus of a decidable propositional premise set is in general undecidable, and can be -complete. These classifications are exact. For first order theories even finite sets of premises can generate such consequence sets in either calculus.     

试论"真矛盾"及次协调逻辑的哲学价值

二十世纪后期以来,再也没有哪一种逻辑像次协调逻辑那样,在取得丰富研究成果的同时,也领略到了极为尖锐的批判,仿佛其本身就是一种意味深长的“矛盾”。依照次协调逻辑“真矛盾”的观点所构建的次协调逻辑系统,夷非所思地试图要容纳我们所认知的悖论、辩证矛盾、甚至逻辑矛盾。次协调逻辑试图要和悖论永久共存,但我们可以为了暂时的搁置这种矛盾,发展某理论的其他方面而接受这种逻辑技术。次协调逻辑在反映人脑的容错机制上具有重要的描述功能,这对提高计算机的智能化具有十分重要的实践意义。     

试论批判性思维与逻辑的关系

“批判性思维”一词已成为当今教育界一个十分时髦的术语。心理学家、教育学家、哲学家都在讨论批判性思维。但是,什么是批判性思维?其逻辑基础是什么呢?我们认为,目前学界对此的认识有待进一步澄清。在逻辑学界,批判性思维已成为当前逻辑学教学改革和发展的一种重要方向。有学者认为,批判性思维与非形式逻辑有着密不可分的联系,甚至有人认为批判性思维与非形式逻辑两者可以不加区别交互使用。该文首先考察了心理学家、教育学家和哲学家们分别给出的批判性思维的定义,然后分析批判性思维与非形式逻辑、形式逻辑之间的相互联系与区别,进而认为形式逻辑和非形式逻辑共同构成了批判性思维的逻辑基础。     

The Class of Extensions of Nelson's Paraconsistent Logic

The article is devoted to the systematic study of the lattice εN4_⊥ consisting of logics extending N4_⊥. The logic N4_⊥ is obtained from paraconsistent Nelson logic N4 by adding the new constant ⊥ and axioms ⊥ → p, p → ∼ ⊥. We study interrelations between εN4_⊥ and the lattice of superintuitionistic logics. Distinguish in εN4_⊥ basic subclasses of explosive logics, normal logics, logics of general form and study how they are relate. The author acknowledges support by the Alexander von Humboldt-Stiftung and by Counsil for Grants under RF President, project NSh - 2112.2003.1.     

Probability Semantics for Quantifier Logic

By supplying propositional calculus with a probability semantics we showed, in our 1996, that finite stochastic problems can be treated by logic-theoretic means equally as well as by the usual set-theoretic ones. In the present paper we continue the investigation to further the use of logical notions in probability theory. It is shown that quantifier logic, when supplied with a probability semantics, is capable of treating stochastic problems involving countably many trials.     

Rectifying the Mischaracterization of Logic by Mental Model Theorists

Khemlani et al. (2018) mischaracterize logic in the course of seeking to show that mental model theory (MMT) can accommodate a form of inference (, let us label it) they find in a high percentage of their subjects. We reveal their mischaracterization and, in so doing, lay a landscape for future modeling by cognitive scientists who may wonder whether human reasoning is consistent with, or perhaps even capturable by, reasoning in a logic or family thereof. Along the way, we note that the properties touted by Khemlani et al. as innovative aspects of MMT-based modeling (e.g., nonmonotonicity) have for decades been, in logic, acknowledged and rigorously specified by families of (implemented) logics. Khemlani et al. (2018) further declare that is “invalid in any modal logic.” We demonstrate this to be false by our introduction (Appendix A) of a new propositional modal logic (within a family of such logics) in which is provably valid, and by the implementation of this logic. A second appendix, B, partially answers the two-part question, “What is a formal logic, and what is it for one to capture empirical phenomena?”     

Absolute Probability Functions for Intuitionistic Propositional Logic

Provided here is a characterisation of absolute probability functions for intuitionistic (propositional) logic L, i.e. a set of constraints on the unary functions P from the statements of L to the reals, which insures that (i) if a statement A of L is provable in L, then P(A) = 1 for every P, L's axiomatisation being thus sound in the probabilistic sense, and (ii) if P(A) = 1 for every P, then A is provable in L, L's axiomatisation being thus complete in the probabilistic sense. As there are theorems of classical (propositional) logic that are not intuitionistic ones, there are unary probability functions for intuitionistic logic that are not classical ones. Provided here because of this is a means of singling out the classical probability functions from among the intuitionistic ones.     

A Note on Binary Inductive Logic

We consider the problem of induction over languages containing binary relations and outline a way of interpreting and constructing a class of probability functions on the sentences of such a language. Some principles of inductive reasoning satisfied by these probability functions are discussed, leading in turn to a representation theorem for a more general class of probability functions satisfying these principles.     

一种应用于中医阴阳五行诊断学说的次协调逻辑(英文)

中医阴阳五行学说博大情深,是中医辨证论治的理论基础,也是指导中医临床诊断与治疗的基本原理,因此对于中医的理论与实践都有着十分重要的价值。但长期以来,一直缺乏对该学说进行严格的形式化研究,使之难以与不断发展中的中医现代化进程相适应。本文就是在这一学说核心内容的基础上,介绍引入次协调逻辑、缺省推理逻辑等先进逻辑来与中医诊断学结合的思想和方法,这样的目的是为今后构造一种符合中医诊断原则的中医阴阳五行推演逻辑系统作准备,该逻辑系统将用来描述基本的中医辨证推演过程。     

Maximum Entropy Inference with Quantified Knowledge

We investigate uncertain reasoning with quantified sentencesof the predicate calculus treated as the limiting case of maximumentropy inference applied to finite domains.     

An examination of the SEP candidate analogical inference rule within pure inductive logic

Within the framework of (Unary) Pure Inductive Logic we investigate four possible formulations of a probabilistic principle of analogy based on a template considered by Paul Bartha in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy [1] and give some characterizations of the probability functions which satisfy them. In addition we investigate an alternative interpretation of analogical support, also considered by Bartha, based not on the enhancement of probability but on the creation of possibility.     

Logic programming,probability, and two-system accounts of reasoning: a rejoinder to Oaksford and Chater (2014)

This reply to Oaksford and Chater’s (O&C)’s critical discussion of our use of logic programming (LP) to model and predict patterns of conditional reasoning will frame the dispute in terms of the semantics of the conditional. We begin by outlining some common features of LP and probabilistic conditionals in knowledge-rich reasoning over long-term memory knowledge bases. For both, context determines causal strength; there are inferences from the absence of certain evidence; and both have analogues of the Ramsey test. Some current work shows how a combination of counting defeaters and statistics from network monitoring can provide the information for graded responses from LP reasoning. With this much introduction, we then respond to O&C’s specific criticisms and misunderstandings.     

The Logic of Theory Assessment

This paper starts by indicating the analysis of Hempel’s conditions of adequacy for any relation of confirmation (Hempel, 1945) as presented in Huber (submitted). There I argue contra Carnap (1962, Section 87) that Hempel felt the need for two concepts of confirmation: one aiming at plausible theories and another aiming at informative theories. However, he also realized that these two concepts are conflicting, and he gave up the concept of confirmation aiming at informative theories. The main part of the paper consists in working out the claim that one can have Hempel’s cake and eat it too — in the sense that there is a logic of theory assessment that takes into account both of the two conflicting aspects of plausibility and informativeness. According to the semantics of this logic, α is an acceptable theory for evidence β if and only if α is both sufficiently plausible given β and sufficiently informative about β. This is spelt out in terms of ranking functions (Spohn, 1988) and shown to represent the syntactically specified notion of an assessment relation. The paper then compares these acceptability relations to explanatory and confirmatory consequence relations (Flach, 2000) as well as to nonmonotonic consequence relations (Kraus et al., 1990). It concludes by relating the plausibility-informativeness approach to Carnap’s positive relevance account, thereby shedding new light on Carnap’s analysis as well as solving another problem of confirmation theory. A precursor of this paper has appeared as “The Logic of Confirmation and Theory Assessment” in L. Běhounek & M. Bílková (eds.), The Logica Yearbook 2004, Prague: Filosofia, 2005, 161–176.     

Toward a More Natural Expression of Quantum Logic with Boolean Fractions

This paper uses a non-distributive system of Boolean fractions (a|b), where a and b are 2-valued propositions or events, to express uncertain conditional propositions and conditional events. These Boolean fractions, ‘a if b’ or ‘a given b’, ordered pairs of events, which did not exist for the founders of quantum logic, can better represent uncertain conditional information just as integer fractions can better represent partial distances on a number line. Since the indeterminacy of some pairs of quantum events is due to the mutual inconsistency of their experimental conditions, this algebra of conditionals can express indeterminacy. In fact, this system is able to express the crucial quantum concepts of orthogonality, simultaneous verifiability, compatibility, and the superposition of quantum events, all without resorting to Hilbert space. A conditional (a|b) is said to be “inapplicable” (or “undefined”) in those instances or models for which b is false. Otherwise the conditional takes the truth-value of proposition a. Thus the system is technically 3-valued, but the 3rd value has nothing to do with a state of ignorance, nor to some half-truth. People already routinely put statements into three categories: true, false, or inapplicable. As such, this system applies to macroscopic as well as microscopic events. Two conditional propositions turn out to be simultaneously verifiable just in case the truth of one implies the applicability of the other. Furthermore, two conditional propositions (a|b) and (c|d) reside in a common Boolean sub-algebra of the non-distributive system of conditional propositions just in case b=d, their conditions are equivalent. Since all aspects of quantum mechanics can be represented with this near classical logic, there is no need to adopt Hilbert space logic as ordinary logic, just a need perhaps to adopt propositional fractions to do logic, just as we long ago adopted integer fractions to do arithmetic. The algebra of Boolean fractions is a natural, near-Boolean extension of Boolean algebra adequate to express quantum logic. While this paper explains one group of quantum anomalies, it nevertheless leaves no less mysterious the ‘influence-at-a-distance’, quantum entanglement phenomena. A quantum realist must still embrace non-local influences to hold that “hidden variables” are the measured properties of particles. But that seems easier than imaging wave-particle duality and instant collapse, as offered by proponents of the standard interpretation of quantum mechanics. Partial support for this work is gratefully acknowledged from the In-House Independent Research Program and from Code 2737 at the Space & Naval Warfare Systems Center (SSC-SD), San Diego, CA 92152-5001. Presently this work is supported by Data Synthesis, 2919 Luna Avenue, San Diego, CA 92117.     

A new formulation of the Principle of Indifference

The idea of a probabilistic logic of inductive inference based on some form of the principle of indifference has always retained a powerful appeal. However, up to now all modifications of the principle failed. In this paper, a new formulation of such a principle is provided that avoids generating paradoxes and inconsistencies. Because of these results, the thesis that probabilities cannot be logical quantities, determined in an objective way through some form of the principle of indifference, is no longer supportable. Later, the paper investigates some implications of the new principle of indifference. To conclude, a re-examination of the foundations of the so-called objective Bayesian inference is called for.     

System JLZ – rational default reasoning by minimal ranking constructions

We present a powerful quasi-probabilistic default formalism for graded defaults based on a well-motivated canonical ranking construction procedure, System JLZ. It implements the minimal construction paradigm and verifies the major inference principles and inheritance desiderata, including rational monotony for propositions and structured cumulativity for default conditionals. With help from a structured ranking semantics for defaults, it also avoids some drawbacks of semi-qualitative entropy maximization and other competing accounts.