article in press - School of Computer Science
... monadic two-variable guarded fragment GF 2mon of classical first-order logic, where guard relations satisfy conditions that can be expressed as monadic second-order definable closure constraints, is decidable. Our contribution is a slight generalisation of this result to account for conditions which ...
... monadic two-variable guarded fragment GF 2mon of classical first-order logic, where guard relations satisfy conditions that can be expressed as monadic second-order definable closure constraints, is decidable. Our contribution is a slight generalisation of this result to account for conditions which ...
The Expressive Power of Modal Dependence Logic
... modal logic a team is just a set of states in a Kripke model. Modal dependence logic extends standard modal logic with team semantics by modal dependence atoms, =(p1 , . . . , pn , q). The intuitive meaning of the formula =(p1 , . . . , pn , q) is that within a team the truth value of the propositio ...
... modal logic a team is just a set of states in a Kripke model. Modal dependence logic extends standard modal logic with team semantics by modal dependence atoms, =(p1 , . . . , pn , q). The intuitive meaning of the formula =(p1 , . . . , pn , q) is that within a team the truth value of the propositio ...
A Proof of Cut-Elimination Theorem for U Logic.
... To make the two systems more comparable, Ardeshir and Vaezian in [1], introduced a modified version of mentioned axiomatization, and called it GBPC*. They also excluded connective ← from B and called the new system B’. They justified this action, by mentioning the main goal of Sambin’s Basic logic, ...
... To make the two systems more comparable, Ardeshir and Vaezian in [1], introduced a modified version of mentioned axiomatization, and called it GBPC*. They also excluded connective ← from B and called the new system B’. They justified this action, by mentioning the main goal of Sambin’s Basic logic, ...
Modal_Logics_Eyal_Ariel_151107
... includes information that agents might not necessarily know but is still important for the system to run (this information is categorized as seen from a “bird’s eye” view of the system). ...
... includes information that agents might not necessarily know but is still important for the system to run (this information is categorized as seen from a “bird’s eye” view of the system). ...
Natural Deduction Calculus for Quantified Propositional Linear
... [Jaskowski (1967)] and improved by Fitch [Fitch (1952)] and Quine [Quine (1950)]. On the other hand, we build on our previous ND constructions for the logic PLTL [Bolotov et al. (2006)] and first order logic [Bolotov et al. (2005)]. Namely, the rules for the linear-time framework are adopted from t ...
... [Jaskowski (1967)] and improved by Fitch [Fitch (1952)] and Quine [Quine (1950)]. On the other hand, we build on our previous ND constructions for the logic PLTL [Bolotov et al. (2006)] and first order logic [Bolotov et al. (2005)]. Namely, the rules for the linear-time framework are adopted from t ...
Propositional Logic
... formulas that is also a model of the formula , is known as the propositonal satisfiability (PSAT) problem. An exhaustive procedure for solving the PSAT problem is to try systematically all of the ways to assign True and False to the atoms in the formula, checking the assignment to see if all form ...
... formulas that is also a model of the formula , is known as the propositonal satisfiability (PSAT) problem. An exhaustive procedure for solving the PSAT problem is to try systematically all of the ways to assign True and False to the atoms in the formula, checking the assignment to see if all form ...
PROVING UNPROVABILITY IN SOME NORMAL MODAL LOGIC
... persuaded that these schemata cannot be restricted to some fixed k. For instance, take RK . An easy induction shows that if we restrict RK to some R(k) then all K a-deducible formulae would be refuted in trees in which every node has no more than k branches. But then the K-unprovable formula _ Altn ...
... persuaded that these schemata cannot be restricted to some fixed k. For instance, take RK . An easy induction shows that if we restrict RK to some R(k) then all K a-deducible formulae would be refuted in trees in which every node has no more than k branches. But then the K-unprovable formula _ Altn ...