Topological-Frame Products of Modal Logics

The simplest bimodal combination of unimodal logics \(\text {L} _1\) and \(\text {L} _2\) is their fusion, \(\text {L} _1 \otimes \text {L} _2\), axiomatized by the theorems of \(\text {L} _1\) for \(\square _1\) and of \(\text {L} _2\) for \(\square _2\), and the rules of modus ponens, necessitation for \(\square _1\) and for \(\square _2\), and substitution. Shehtman introduced the frame product \(\text {L} _1 \times \text {L} _2\), as the logic of the products of certain Kripke frames: these logics are two-dimensional as well as bimodal. Van Benthem, Bezhanishvili, ten Cate and Sarenac transposed Shehtman’s idea to the topological semantics and introduced the topological product \(\text {L} _1 \times _t \text {L} _2\), as the logic of the products of certain topological spaces. For almost all well-studies logics, we have \(\text {L} _1 \otimes \text {L} _2 \subsetneq \text {L} _1 \times \text {L} _2\), for example, \(\text {S4} \otimes \text {S4} \subsetneq \text {S4} \times \text {S4} \). Van Benthem et al. show, by contrast, that \(\text {S4} \times _t \text {S4} = \text {S4} \otimes \text {S4} \). It is straightforward to define the product of a topological space and a frame: the result is a topologized frame, i.e., a set together with a topology and a binary relation. In this paper, we introduce topological-frame products \(\text {L} _1 \times _ tf \text {L} _2\) of modal logics, providing a complete axiomatization of \(\text {S4} \times _ tf \text {L} \), whenever \(\text {L} \) is a Kripke complete Horn axiomatizable extension of the modal logic D: these extensions include \(\text {T} , \text {S4} \) and \(\text {S5} \), but not \(\text {K} \) or \(\text {K4} \). We leave open the problem of axiomatizing \(\text {S4} \times _ tf \text {K} \), \(\text {S4} \times _ tf \text {K4} \), and other related logics. When \(\text {L} = \text {S4} \), our result confirms a conjecture of van Benthem et al. concerning the logic of products of Alexandrov spaces with arbitrary topological spaces.     

A Second Pretabular Classical Relevance Logic

Pretabular logics are those that lack finite characteristic matrices, although all of their normal proper extensions do have some finite characteristic matrix. Although for Anderson and Belnap’s relevance logic R, there exists an uncountable set of pretabular extensions (Swirydowicz in J Symb Log 73(4):1249–1270, 2008), for the classical relevance logic \( \hbox {KR} = \hbox {R} + \{(A\,\, \& \sim A)\rightarrow B\}\) there has been known so far a pretabular extension: \({\mathcal L}\) (Galminas and Mersch in Stud Log 100:1211–1221, 2012). In Section 1 of this paper, we introduce some history of pretabularity and some relevance logics and their algebras. In Section 2, we introduce a new pretabular logic, which we shall name \({\mathcal M}\), and which is a neighbor of \({\mathcal L}\), in that it is an extension of KR. Also in this section, an algebraic semantics, ‘\({\mathcal M}\)-algebras’, will be introduced and the characterization of \({\mathcal M}\) to the set of finite \({\mathcal M}\)-algebras will be shown. In Section 3, the pretabularity of \({\mathcal M}\) will be proved.     

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.     

A Method of Generating Modal Logics Defining Jaśkowski’s Discussive Logic D<Subscript>2</Subscript>

Ja?kowski’s discussive logic D₂ was formulated with the help of the modal logic S5 as follows (see [7, 8]): \({A \in {D_{2}}}\) iff \({\ulcorner\diamond{{A}^{\bullet}}\urcorner \in {\rm S}5}\), where (–)^? is a translation of discussive formulae from For^d into the modal language. We say that a modal logic L defines D₂ iff \({{\rm D}_{2} = \{A \in {\rm For^{\rm d}} : \ulcorner\diamond{{A}^{\bullet}}\urcorner \in {\it L}\}}\). In [14] and [10] were respectively presented the weakest normal and the weakest regular logic which (?): have the same theses beginning with ‘\({\diamond}\)’ as S5. Of course, all logics fulfilling the above condition, define D₂. In [10] it was prowed that in the cases of logics closed under congruence the following holds: defining D₂ is equivalent to having the property (?). In this paper we show that this equivalence holds also for all modal logics which are closed under replacement of tautological equivalents (rte-logics).We give a general method which, for any class of modal logics determined by a set of joint axioms and rules, generates in the given class the weakest logic having the property (?). Thus, for the class of all modal logics we obtain the weakest modal logic which owns this property. On the other hand, applying the method to various classes of modal logics: rte-logics, congruential, monotonic, regular and normal, we obtain the weakest in a given class logic defining D₂.     

Arithmetical Completeness Theorem for Modal Logic $$\mathsf{}$$

We prove that for any recursively axiomatized consistent extension T of Peano Arithmetic, there exists a \(\Sigma _2\) provability predicate of T whose provability logic is precisely the modal logic \(\mathsf{K}\). For this purpose, we introduce a new bimodal logic \(\mathsf{GLK}\), and prove the Kripke completeness theorem and the uniform arithmetical completeness theorem for \(\mathsf{GLK}\).     

Resampling-Based Inference Methods for Comparing Two Coefficients Alpha

The two-sample problem for Cronbach’s coefficient \(\alpha _C\), as an estimate of test or composite score reliability, has attracted little attention compared to the extensive treatment of the one-sample case. It is necessary to compare the reliability of a test for different subgroups, for different tests or the short and long forms of a test. In this paper, we study statistical procedures of comparing two coefficients \(\alpha _{C,1}\) and \(\alpha _{C,2}\). The null hypothesis of interest is \(H_0 : \alpha _{C,1} = \alpha _{C,2}\), which we test against one-or two-sided alternatives. For this purpose, resampling-based permutation and bootstrap tests are proposed for two-group multivariate non-normal models under the general asymptotically distribution-free (ADF) setting. These statistical tests ensure a better control of the type-I error, in finite or very small sample sizes, when the state-of-affairs ADF large-sample test may fail to properly attain the nominal significance level. By proper choice of a studentized test statistic, the resampling tests are modified in order to be valid asymptotically even in non-exchangeable data frameworks. Moreover, extensions of this approach to other designs and reliability measures are discussed as well. Finally, the usefulness of the proposed resampling-based testing strategies is demonstrated in an extensive simulation study and illustrated by real data applications.     

Arithmetical Soundness and Completeness for $$\varvec{\Sigma }_{\varvec{2}}$$ Numerations

We prove that for each recursively axiomatized consistent extension T of Peano Arithmetic and \(n \ge 2\), there exists a \(\Sigma _2\) numeration \(\tau (u)\) of T such that the provability logic of the provability predicate \(\mathsf{Pr}_\tau (x)\) naturally constructed from \(\tau (u)\) is exactly \(\mathsf{K}+ \Box (\Box ^n p \rightarrow p) \rightarrow \Box p\). This settles Sacchetti’s problem affirmatively.     

Correia Semantics Revisited

Despite a renewed interest in Richard Angell’s logic of analytic containment (\({\mathsf{AC}}\)), the first semantics for \({\mathsf{AC}}\) introduced by Fabrice Correia has remained largely unexamined. This paper describes a reasonable approach to Correia semantics by means of a correspondence with a nine-valued semantics for \({\mathsf{AC}}\). The present inquiry employs this correspondence to provide characterizations of a number of propositional logics intermediate between \({\mathsf{AC}}\) and classical logic. In particular, we examine Correia’s purported characterization of classical logic with respect to his semantics, showing the condition Correia cites in fact characterizes the “logic of paradox” \({\mathsf{LP}}\) and provide a correct characterization. Finally, we consider some remarks on related matters, such as the applicability of the present correspondence to the analysis of the system \({\mathsf{AC}^{\ast}}\) and an intriguing relationship between Correia’s models and articular models for first degree entailment.     

On All Strong Kleene Generalizations of Classical Logic

By using the notions of exact truth (‘true and not false’) and exact falsity (‘false and not true’), one can give 16 distinct definitions of classical consequence. This paper studies the class of relations that results from these definitions in settings that are paracomplete, paraconsistent or both and that are governed by the (extended) Strong Kleene schema. Besides familiar logics such as Strong Kleene logic (K3), the Logic of Paradox (LP) and First Degree Entailment (FDE), the resulting class of all Strong Kleene generalizations of classical logic also contains a host of unfamiliar logics. We first study the members of our class semantically, after which we present a uniform sequent calculus (the SK calculus) that is sound and complete with respect to all of them. Two further sequent calculi (the \({{\bf SK}^\mathcal{P}}\) and \({\bf SK}^{\mathcal{N}}\) calculus) will be considered, which serve the same purpose and which are obtained by applying general methods (due to Baaz et al.) to construct sequent calculi for many-valued logics. Rules and proofs in the SK calculus are much simpler and shorter than those of the \({\bf SK}^{\mathcal{P}}\) and the \({\bf SK}^{\mathcal{N}}\) calculus, which is one of the reasons to prefer the SK calculus over the latter two. Besides favourably comparing the SK calculus to both the \({\bf SK}^{\mathcal{P}}\) and the \({\bf SK}^{\mathcal{N}}\) calculus, we also hint at its philosophical significance.     

Sequent Calculi for Semi-De Morgan and De Morgan Algebras

A contraction-free and cut-free sequent calculus \(\mathsf {G3SDM}\) for semi-De Morgan algebras, and a structural-rule-free and single-succedent sequent calculus \(\mathsf {G3DM}\) for De Morgan algebras are developed. The cut rule is admissible in both sequent calculi. Both calculi enjoy the decidability and Craig interpolation. The sequent calculi are applied to prove some embedding theorems: \(\mathsf {G3DM}\) is embedded into \(\mathsf {G3SDM}\) via Gödel–Gentzen translation. \(\mathsf {G3DM}\) is embedded into a sequent calculus for classical propositional logic. \(\mathsf {G3SDM}\) is embedded into the sequent calculus \(\mathsf {G3ip}\) for intuitionistic propositional logic.     

The Category of Node-and-Choice Preforms for Extensive-Form Games

It would be useful to have a category of extensive-form games whose isomorphisms specify equivalences between games. Since working with entire games is too large a project for a single paper, I begin here with preforms, where a “preform” is a rooted tree together with choices and information sets. In particular, this paper first defines the category \(\mathbf {Tree}\), whose objects are “functioned trees”, which are specially designed to be incorporated into preforms. I show that \(\mathbf {Tree}\) is isomorphic to the full subcategory of \(\mathbf {Grph}\) whose objects are converging arborescences. Then the paper defines the category \(\mathbf {NCP}\), whose objects are “node-and-choice preforms”, each of which consists of a node set, a choice set, and an operator mapping node-choice pairs to nodes. I characterize the \(\mathbf {NCP}\) isomorphisms, define a forgetful functor from \(\mathbf {NCP}\) to \(\mathbf {Tree}\), and show that \(\mathbf {Tree}\) is equivalent to the full subcategory of \(\mathbf {NCP}\) whose objects are perfect-information preforms. The paper also shows that many game-theoretic entities can be derived from preforms, and that these entities are well-behaved with respect to \(\mathbf {NCP}\) morphisms and isomorphisms.     

Public announcement logic with distributed knowledge: expressivity,completeness and complexity

While dynamic epistemic logics with common knowledge have been extensively studied, dynamic epistemic logics with distributed knowledge have so far received far less attention. In this paper we study extensions of public announcement logic (\(\mathcal{PAL }\)) with distributed knowledge, in particular their expressivity, axiomatisations and complexity. \(\mathcal{PAL }\) extended only with distributed knowledge is not more expressive than standard epistemic logic with distributed knowledge. Our focus is therefore on \(\mathcal{PACD }\), the result of adding both common and distributed knowledge to \(\mathcal{PAL }\), which is more expressive than each of its component logics. We introduce an axiomatisation of \(\mathcal{PACD }\), which is not surprising: it is the combination of well-known axioms. The completeness proof, however, is not trivial, and requires novel combinations and extensions of techniques for dealing with \(S5\) knowledge, distributed knowledge, common knowledge and public announcements at the same time. We furthermore show that \(\mathcal{PACD }\) is decidable, more precisely that it is \(\textsc {exptime}\)-complete. This result also carries over to \(\mathcal{S 5\mathcal CD }\) with common and distributed knowledge operators for all coalitions (and not only the grand coalition). Finally, we propose a notion of a trans-bisimulation to generalise certain results and give deeper insight into the proofs.     

Propositional Epistemic Logics with Quantification Over Agents of Knowledge

The paper presents a family of propositional epistemic logics such that languages of these logics are extended by quantification over modal (epistemic) operators or over agents of knowledge and extended by predicate symbols that take modal (epistemic) operators (or agents) as arguments. Denote this family by \({\mathcal {P}\mathcal {E}\mathcal {L}}_{({ QK})}\). There exist epistemic logics whose languages have the above mentioned properties (see, for example Corsi and Orlandelli in Stud Log 101:1159–1183, 2013; Fitting et al. in Stud Log 69:133–169, 2001; Grove in Artif Intell 74(2):311–350, 1995; Lomuscio and Colombetti in Proceedings of ATAL 1996. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (LNCS), vol 1193, pp 71–85, 1996). But these logics are obtained from first-order modal logics, while a logic of \({\mathcal {P}\mathcal {E}\mathcal {L}}_{({ QK})}\) can be regarded as a propositional multi-modal logic whose language includes quantifiers over modal (epistemic) operators and predicate symbols that take modal (epistemic) operators as arguments. Among the logics of \({\mathcal {P}\mathcal {E}\mathcal {L}}_{({ QK})}\) there are logics with a syntactical distinction between two readings of epistemic sentences: de dicto and de re (between ‘knowing that’ and ‘knowing of’). We show the decidability of logics of \({\mathcal {P}\mathcal {E}\mathcal {L}}_{({ QK})}\) with the help of the loosely guarded fragment (LGF) of first-order logic. Namely, we generalize LGF to a higher-order decidable loosely guarded fragment. The latter fragment allows us to construct various decidable propositional epistemic logics with quantification over modal (epistemic) operators. The family of this logics coincides with \({\mathcal {P}\mathcal {E}\mathcal {L}}_{({ QK})}\). There are decidable propositional logics such that these logics implicitly contain quantification over agents of knowledge, but languages of these logics are usual propositional epistemic languages without quantifiers and predicate symbols (see Grove and Halpern in J Log Comput 3(4):345–378, 1993). Some logics of \({\mathcal {P}\mathcal {E}\mathcal {L}}_{({ QK})}\) can be regarded as counterparts of logics defined in Grove and Halpern (J Log Comput 3(4):345–378, 1993). We prove that the satisfiability problem for these logics of \({\mathcal {P}\mathcal {E}\mathcal {L}}_{({ QK})}\) is Pspace-complete using their counterparts in Grove and Halpern (J Log Comput 3(4):345–378, 1993).     

A Categorical Equivalence Motivated by Kalman’s Construction

An equivalence between the category of MV-algebras and the category \({{\rm MV^{\bullet}}}\) is given in Castiglioni et al. (Studia Logica 102(1):67–92, 2014). An integral residuated lattice with bottom is an MV-algebra if and only if it satisfies the equations \({a = \neg \neg a, (a \rightarrow b) \vee (b\rightarrow a) = 1}\) and \({a \odot (a\rightarrow b) = a \wedge b}\). An object of \({{\rm MV^{\bullet}}}\) is a residuated lattice which in particular satisfies some equations which correspond to the previous equations. In this paper we extend the equivalence to the category whose objects are pairs (A, I), where A is an MV-algebra and I is an ideal of A.     

Epistemic modals and informational consequence

Recently, Yalcin (Epistemic modals. Mind, 116, 983–1026, 2007) put forward a novel account of epistemic modals. It is based on the observation that sentences of the form ‘\({\phi}\) &; Might \({\neg\phi}\) ’ do not embed under ‘suppose’ and ‘if’. Yalcin concludes that such sentences must be contradictory and develops a notion of informational consequence which validates this idea. I will show that informational consequence is inadequate as an account of the logic of epistemic modals: it cannot deal with reasoning from uncertain premises. Finally, I offer an alternative way of explaining the relevant linguistic data.     

Axiomatizing Jaśkowski’s Discussive Logic $$\mathbf {D_2}$$

We outline the rather complicated history of attempts at axiomatizing Ja?kowski’s discussive logic \(\mathbf {D_2}\) and show that some clarity can be had by paying close attention to the language we work with. We then examine the problem of axiomatizing \(\mathbf {D_2}\) in languages involving discussive conjunctions. Specifically, we show that recent attempts by Ciuciura are mistaken. Finally, we present an axiomatization of \(\mathbf {D_2}\) in the language Ja?kowski suggested in his second paper on discussive logic, by following a remark of da Costa and Dubikajtis. We also deal with an interesting variant of \(\mathbf {D_2}\), introduced by Ciuciura, in which negation is also taken to be discussive.