Modal model theory

1973 ◽  
pp. 599-617 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. C. Chang
Keyword(s):  
Model Theory ◽  
Modal Model

Normal modal model theory

1975 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 97-131 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth A. Bowen
Keyword(s):  
Model Theory ◽  
Modal Model

Well-behaved modal logics

1984 ◽  
Vol 49 (4) ◽  
pp. 1393-1402
Author(s):  
Harold T. Hodes
Keyword(s):  
Modal Logic ◽  
Model Theory ◽  
Classical Model ◽  
Classical Case ◽  
Recursion Theory ◽  
Modal Logics ◽  
Modal Model ◽  
The Right ◽  
Domain Property ◽  
The Way

Much of the literature on the model theory of modal logics suffers from two weaknesses. Firstly, there is a lack of generality; theorems are proved piecemeal about this or that modal logic, or at best small classes of logics. Much of the literature, e.g. [1], [2], and [3], confines attention to structures with the expanding domain property (i.e., if wRu then Ā(w) ⊆ Ā(u)); the syntactic counterpart of this restriction is assumption of the converse Barcan scheme, a move which offers (in Russell's phrase) “all the advantages of theft over honest toil”. Secondly, I think there has been a failure to hit on the best ways of extending classical model theoretic notions to modal contexts. This weakness makes the literature boring, since a large part of the interest of modal model theory resides in the way in which classical model theoretic notions extend, and in some cases divide, in the modal setting. (The relation between α-recursion theory and classical recursion theory is analogous to that between modal model theory and classical model theory. Much of the work in α-recursion theory involved finding the right definitions (e.g., of recursive-in) and separating concepts which collapse in the classical case (e.g. of finiteness and boundedness).)The notion of a well-behaved modal logic is introduced in §3 to make possible rather general results; of course our attention will not be restricted to structures with the expanding domain property. Rather than prove piecemeal that familiar modal logics are well-behaved, in §4 we shall consider a class of “special” modal logics, which obviously includes many familiar logics and which is included in the class of well-behaved modal logics.

Some results in modal model theory

1974 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
pp. 496-508 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Mortimer
Keyword(s):  
Modal Logic ◽  
Model Theory ◽  
Classical Logic ◽  
Classical Model ◽  
Completeness Theorem ◽  
Strong Completeness ◽  
Barcan Formula ◽  
Weak Completeness ◽  
Modal Model ◽  
Omitting Types

This paper is concerned with extending some basic results from classical model theory to modal logic.In §1, we define the majority of terms used in the paper, and explain our notation. A full catalogue would be excessive, and we cite [3] and [7] as general references.Many papers on modal logic that have appeared are concerned with (i) introducing a new modal logic, and (ii) proving a weak completeness theorem for it. Theorem 1, in §2, in many cases allows us to conclude immediately that a strong completeness theorem holds for such a logic in languages of arbitrary cardinality. In particular, this is true of S4 with the Barcan formula.In §3 we strengthen Theorem 1 for a number of modal logics to deal with the satisfaction of several sets of sentences, and so obtain a realizing types theorem. Finally, an omitting types theorem, generalizing the result for classical logic (see [5]) is proved in §4.Several consequences of Theorem 1 are already to be found in the literature. [2] gives a proof of strong completeness in languages of arbitrary cardinality of various logics without the Barcan formula, and [8] for some logics in countable languages with it. In the latter case, the result for uncountable languages is cited, without proof, in [1], and there credited to Montague. Our proof was found independently.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document