Linear reasoning in modal logic

1984 ◽  
Vol 49 (4) ◽  
pp. 1363-1378 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melvin Fitting

In [1] Craig introduced a proof procedure for first order classical logic called linear reasoning. In it, a proof of P ⊃ Q consists of a sequence of formulas, each of which implies the next, beginning with P and ending with Q. And one of the formulas in the sequence will be an interpolation formula for P ⊃ Q. Indeed, this was the first proof of the Craig interpolation theorem, some of whose important consequences were demonstrated in a companion paper [2]. In this paper we present systems of linear reasoning for several standard modal logics: K, T, K4, S4, D, D4, and GL. Similar systems can be constructed for several regular, nonnormal modal logics too, though we do not do so here. And just as in the classical case, interpolation theorems are easy consequences. Such theorems are well known for the logics considered here. There is a model theoretic argument in [6], an argument using Gentzen systems in [8], an argument using consistency properties in [4] and [5], and an argument using symmetric Gentzen systems in [5]. This paper presents what seems to be the first modal proof that follows Craig's original methods. We note that if the modal rules given here are dropped, a classical linear reasoning system results, which is related to, but not the same as those in [1] and [10].Since the basic linear reasoning ideas are fully illustrated by the propositional case, we present that first, to keep the clutter down. Later we show how the techniques can generally be extended to encompass quantifiers. We do not follow [1] in making heavy use of prenex form, since it is not generally available in modal logics. Fortunately, it plays no essential role.

10.29007/53fk ◽  
2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Toman ◽  
Grant Weddell

We outline the implementation of a query compiler for relational queries that generates query plans with respect to a database schema, that is, a set of arbitrary first-order constraints, and a distinguished subset of predicate symbols from the underlying signature that correspond to access paths. The compiler is based on a variant of the Craig interpolation theorem, with reasoning realized via a modified analytic tableau proof procedure. This procedure decouples the generation of candidate plans that are interpolants from the tableau proof procedure, and applies A*-based search with respect to an external cost model to arbitrate among the alternative candidate plans. The tableau procedure itself is implemented as a virtual machine that operates on a compiled and optimized byte-code that faithfully implements reasoning with respect to the database schema constraints and a user query.


2012 ◽  
Vol 546-547 ◽  
pp. 570-575 ◽  
Author(s):  
Le Zou ◽  
Jin Xie ◽  
Chang Wen Li

The advantages of barycentric interpolation formulations in computation are small number of floating points operations and good numerical stability. Adding a new data pair, the barycentric interpolation formula don’t require to renew computation of all basis functions. Thiele-type continued fractions interpolation and Newton interpolation may be the favoured nonlinear and linear interpolation. A new kind of trivariate blending rational interpolants were constructed by combining barycentric interpolation, Thiele continued fractions and Newton interpolation. We discussed the interpolation theorem, dual interpolation, no poles of the property and error estimation.


1975 ◽  
Vol 40 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacques Stern

The original aim of this paper was to show that forcing provided a useful and unifying tool in the model theory of finite and admissible languages. Roughly speaking, any result obtained by a Henkin proof, by Makkai's method or by an omitting type argument can be given an alternative proof via forcing. Finally, instead of giving new proofs of a number of known theorems, we have chosen to focus on the interpolation theorem for many-sorted languages. The main result of this paper is thus a generalization of Feferman's theorems ([2], [3]) with a completely different proof; this was announced in [8] and [9].For more on forcing techniques in model theory the reader should consult [4] as well as [5]. He should also compare forcing and boolean-valued models developed in [6] for the classical case and in [7] for admissible languages. Throughout the paper familiarity with the standard concepts of model theory is assumed.The author wishes to express his gratitude to J. L. Krivine and K. McAloon for supervising his work. Thanks are also due to J. P. Ressayre for helpful suggestions and to R. L. Vaught for an interesting discussion on forcing in model theory. Finally, an interesting application has been pointed out by S. Feferman and has been included with his permission.


2002 ◽  
Vol 67 (2) ◽  
pp. 621-634 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melvin Fitting

AbstractAn interpolation theorem holds for many standard modal logics, but first order S5 is a prominent example of a logic for which it fails. In this paper it is shown that a first order S5 interpolation theorem can be proved provided the logic is extended to contain propositional quantifiers. A proper statement of the result involves some subtleties, but this is the essence of it.


1986 ◽  
Vol 51 (4) ◽  
pp. 969-980 ◽  
Author(s):  
George Weaver ◽  
Jeffrey Welaish

The following is a contribution to the abstract study of the model theory of modal logics. Historically, individual modal logics have been specified deductively; and, as a result, it has seemed natural to view modal logics as sets of sentences provable in some deductive system. This proof theoretic view has influenced the abstract study of modal logics. For example, Fine [1975] defines a modal logic to be any set of sentences in the modal language L□ which contains all tautologies, all instances of the schema (□(ϕ ⊃ Ψ) ⊃ (□ϕ ⊃ □Ψ)), and which is closed under modus ponens, necessitation and substitution.Here, however, modal logics are equated with classes of “possible world” interpretations. “Worlds” are taken to be ordered pairs (a, λ), where a is a sentential interpretation and λ is an ordinal. Properties of the accessibility relation are identified with those classes of binary relational systems closed under isomorphisms. The origin of this approach is the study of alternative Kripke semantics for the normal modal logics (cf. Weaver [1973]). It is motivated by the desire that modal logics provide accounts of both logical truth and logical consequence (cf. Corcoran and Weaver [1969]) and the realization that there are alternative Kripke semantics for S4, B and M which give identical accounts of logical truth, but different accounts of logical consequence (cf. Weaver [1973]). It is shown that the Craig interpolation theorem holds for any modal logic which has characteristic modal axioms and whose associated class of binary relational systems is closed under subsystems and finite direct products. The argument uses a back and forth construction to establish a modal analogue of Robinson's theorem. The argument for the interpolation theorem from Robinson's theorem employs modal analogues of the Ehrenfeucht-Fraïssé characterization of elementary equivalence and Hintikka's distributive normal form, and is itself a modal analogue of a first order argument (cf. Weaver [1982]).


1984 ◽  
Vol 49 (4) ◽  
pp. 1393-1402
Author(s):  
Harold T. Hodes

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.


2021 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 216-216
Author(s):  
Bruno Costa Coscarelli

AbstractThe purpose of this thesis is to develop a paraconsistent Model Theory. The basis for such a theory was launched by Walter Carnielli, Marcelo Esteban Coniglio, Rodrigo Podiack, and Tarcísio Rodrigues in the article ‘On the Way to a Wider Model Theory: Completeness Theorems for First-Order Logics of Formal Inconsistency’ [The Review of Symbolic Logic, vol. 7 (2014)].Naturally, a complete theory cannot be fully developed in a single work. Indeed, the goal of this work is to show that a paraconsistent Model Theory is a sound and worthy possibility. The pursuit of this goal is divided in three tasks: The first one is to give the theory a philosophical meaning. The second one is to transpose as many results from the classical theory to the new one as possible. The third one is to show an application of the theory to practical science.The response to the first task is a Paraconsistent Reasoning System. The start point is that paraconsistency is an epistemological concept. The pursuit of a deeper understanding of the phenomenon of paraconsistency from this point of view leads to a reasoning system based on the Logics of Formal Inconsistency. Models are regarded as states of knowledge and the concept of isomorphism is reformulated so as to give raise to a new concept that preserves a portion of the whole knowledge of each state. Based on this, a notion of refinement is created which may occur from inside or from outside the state.In order to respond to the second task, two important classical results, namely the Omitting Types Theorem and Craig’s Interpolation Theorem are shown to hold in the new system and it is also shown that, if classical results in general are to hold in a paraconsistent system, then such a system should be in essence how it was developed here.Finally, the response to the third task is a proposal of what a Paraconsistent Logic Programming may be. For that, the basis for a paraconsistent PROLOG is settled in the light of the ideas developed so far.Abstract prepared by Bruno Costa Coscarelli.E-mail: [email protected]: http://repositorio.unicamp.br/jspui/handle/REPOSIP/331697


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document