Skip to main content
Log in

A Few More Useful 8-valued Logics for Reasoning with Tetralattice EIGHT 4

  • Published:
Studia Logica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In their useful logic for a computer network Shramko and Wansing generalize initial values of Belnap’s 4-valued logic to the set 16 to be the power-set of Belnap’s 4. This generalization results in a very specific algebraic structure — the trilattice SIXTEEN 3 with three orderings: information, truth and falsity. In this paper, a slightly different way of generalization is presented. As a base for further generalization a set 3 is chosen, where initial values are a — incoming data is asserted, d — incoming data is denied, and u — incoming data is neither asserted nor denied, that corresponds to the answer “don’t know”. In so doing, the power-set of 3, that is the set 8 is considered. It turns out that there are not three but four orderings naturally defined on the set 8 that form the tetralattice EIGHT 4. Besides three ordering relations mentioned above it is an extra uncertainty ordering. Quite predictably, the logics generated by a–order (truth order) and d–order (falsity order) coincide with first-degree entailment. Finally logic with two kinds of operations (a–connectives and d–connectives) and consequence relation defined via a–ordering is considered. An adequate axiomatization for this logic is proposed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Anderson A.R., Belnap N.D.: Entailment: The Logic of Relevance and Necessity, Vol. I. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ (1975)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Anderson A.R., Belnap N.D., Dunn J.M.: Entailment: The Logic of Relevance and Necessity, Vol. II. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Arieli, O. and Avron, A., ‘Logical bilattices and inconsistent data’, in: Proceedings 9th IEEE Annual Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, IEEE Press, 1994, pp. 468–476.

  4. Arieli O., Avron A.: Reasoning with logical bilattices. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 5, 25–63 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Avron A.: The structure of interlaced bilattices. Mathematical Structures in Computer Science 6, 287–299 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Belnap N.D. (1977). A useful four-valued logic. In: Dunn J.M., Epstein G. (eds) Modern Uses of Multiple-Valued Logic. D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, pp 8–37

    Google Scholar 

  7. Belnap, N.D., ‘How a computer should think’, in: G. Ryle (ed.), Contemporary Aspects of Philosophy, Oriel Press, 1977, pp. 30–55.

  8. Dunn, J.M., The Algebra of Intensional Logics, Doctoral Dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, Ann Arbor, 1966 (University Microfilms).

  9. Dunn J.M.: ‘An intuitive semantics for first degree relevant implications’ (abstract). Journal of Symbolic Logic 36, 362–363 (1971)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Dunn J.M.: Intuitive semantics for first-degree entailment and coupled trees. Philosophical Studies 29, 149–168 (1976)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Fitting M.: Bilattices and the theory of truth. Journal of Philosophical Logic 18, 225–256 (1989)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Fitting, M., ‘Bilattices in logic programming’, in: G. Epstein (ed.), The Twentieth International Symposium on Multiple-Valued Logic, IEEE Press, 1990, pp. 238–246.

  13. Fitting M.: Bilattices and the semantics of logic programming. Journal of Logic Programming 11, 91–116 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Fitting, M., ‘Bilattices are nice things’, in V. F. Hendricks, S.A. Pedersen and T. Bolander (eds.), Self-Reference, CSLI Publications, Cambridge University Press, 2004.

  15. Ginsberg, M., ‘Multi-valued logics‘’, in: Proceedings of AAAI-86, Fifth National Conference on Artificial Intellegence, Morgan Kaufman Publishers, 1986, pp. 243– 247.

  16. Shramko Y., Dunn J.M., Takenaka T.: The trilattice of constructive truth values. Journal of Logic and Computation 11, 761–788 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Shramko Y., Wansing H.: Some useful sixteen-valued logics: How a computer network should think. Journal of Philosophical Logic 34, 121–153 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Shramko Y., Wansing H.: Hyper-contradictions, generalized truth values and logics of truth and falsehood. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 15, 403–424 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Wansing, H. and Shramko Y., ‘Harmonious many-valued propositional logics and the logic of computer networks’, in: C. Dégremont, L. Keiff and H. Rückert (eds.), Dialogues, Logics and Other Strange Things. Essays in Honour of Shahid Rahman, College Publications, 2008, pp. 491–516.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dmitry Zaitsev.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Zaitsev, D. A Few More Useful 8-valued Logics for Reasoning with Tetralattice EIGHT 4 . Stud Logica 92, 265–280 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11225-009-9198-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11225-009-9198-x

Keywords

Navigation