AbstractSeveral justification logics have evolved, starting with the logicLP, (Artemov 2001). These can be thought of as explicit versions of modal logics, or logics of knowledge or belief, in which the unanalyzed necessity (knowledge, belief) operator has been replaced with a family of explicit justification terms. Modal logics come in various strengths. For their corresponding justification logics, differing strength is reflected in different vocabularies. What we show here is that for justification logics corresponding to modal logics extending T, various familiar extensions are actually conservative with respect to each other. Our method of proof is very simple, and general enough to handle several justification logics not directly corresponding to distinct modal logics. Our methods do not, however, allow us to prove comparable results for justification logics corresponding to modal logics that do not extend T. That is, we are able to handle explicit logics of knowledge, but not explicit logics of belief. This remains open.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
References found in this work
No references found.
Citations of this work
Conservativity for Logics of Justified Belief: Two Approaches.Robert S. Milnikel - 2012 - Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 163 (7):809-819.
Similar books and articles
Kripke Semantics for Modal Substructural Logics.Norihiro Kamide - 2002 - Journal of Logic, Language and Information 11 (4):453-470.
Simulation and Transfer Results in Modal Logic – a Survey.Marcus Kracht & Frank Wolter - 1997 - Studia Logica 59 (2):149-177.
Term-Modal Logics.Melvin Fitting, Lars Thalmann & Andrei Voronkov - 2001 - Studia Logica 69 (1):133-169.
On Regular Modal Logics with Axiom □ ⊤ → □□ ⊤.Kazimierz Świrydowicz - 1990 - Studia Logica 49 (2):171 - 174.