Branching Time Axiomatized With the Use of Change Operators

Logic Journal of the IGPL 31 (5):894-906 (2023)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

We present a temporal logic of branching time with four primitive operators: |$\exists {\mathcal {C}}$| – it may change whether; |$\forall {\mathcal {C}} $| – it must change whether; |$\exists \Box $| – it may be endlessly unchangeable that; and |$\forall \Box $| – it must be endlessly unchangeable that. Semantically, operator |$\forall {\mathcal {C}}$| expresses a change in the logical value of the given formula in every state that may be an immediate successor of the one considered, while |$\exists {\mathcal {C}}$| expresses a change in the logical value of the given formula in some state that is a possible immediate successor. |$\forall {\mathcal {C}} $| and |$\exists {\mathcal {C}}$| are not normal operators, they are not mutually definable and have unusual properties: |$\forall {\mathcal {C}} A\leftrightarrow \forall {\mathcal {C}} \neg A$| and |$\exists {\mathcal {C}} A \leftrightarrow \exists {\mathcal {C}} \neg A$| are axioms. Operators |$\exists \Box $| and |$\forall \Box $| express endless unchangeability in some and all paths, respectively. Our axiomatization contains two infinitary rules that allow one to obtain |$\exists \Box A$| from infinitely many combinations of formulas with |$A, \neg, \forall {\mathcal {C}}, \land $|⁠, and to get |$\forall \Box A$| from infinitely many combinations of formulas with |$A, \neg, \exists {\mathcal {C}}, \land $|⁠. We show that our formalism is complete by presenting a bridge between our logic and logic |$\textsf {UB}$|⁠, which is a fragment of |$\textsf {CTL}$| in which until operators does not occur.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,897

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

First-Order Logic of Change.Kordula Świętorzecka - forthcoming - Logic Journal of the IGPL.
An extended branching-time ockhamist temporal logic.Mark Brown & Valentin Goranko - 1999 - Journal of Logic, Language and Information 8 (2):143-166.
From BDI and stit to bdi-stit logic.Caroline Semmling & Heinrich Wansing - 2008 - Logic and Logical Philosophy 17 (1-2):185-207.
Linear, branching time and joint closure semantics for temporal logic.Joeri Engelfriet & Jan Treur - 2002 - Journal of Logic, Language and Information 11 (4):389-425.
Travelling in Branching Time.Manolo Martínez - 2011 - Disputatio 4 (31):59-75.
Branching space-time, modal logic, and the counterfactual conditional.Thomas Muller - 2001 - In T. Placek & J. Butterfield (eds.), Non-Locality and Modality. Kluwer Academic Publishers. pp. 273--291.
Temporal necessity and the conditional.Charles B. Cross - 1990 - Studia Logica 49 (3):345-363.
Undivided and indistinguishable histories in branching-time logics.Alberto Zanardo - 1998 - Journal of Logic, Language and Information 7 (3):297-315.
Branching and (in)determinism.Jiri Benovsky - 2013 - Philosophical Papers 42 (2):151-173.

Analytics

Added to PP
2023-09-28

Downloads
9 (#1,254,142)

6 months
5 (#639,324)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Citations of this work

First-Order Logic of Change.Kordula Świętorzecka - forthcoming - Logic Journal of the IGPL.

Add more citations

References found in this work

New Essays on Human Understanding.G. W. Leibniz - 1981 - Tijdschrift Voor Filosofie 45 (3):489-490.
Logics of Time and Computation.Robert Goldblatt - 1990 - Studia Logica 49 (2):284-286.
Logics of essence and accident.Joao Marcos - 2005 - Bulletin of the Section of Logic 34 (1):43-56.
A note on logics of essence and accident.David R. Gilbert & Giorgio Venturi - 2020 - Logic Journal of the IGPL 28 (5):881-891.

View all 12 references / Add more references