Changing Modalities

Lavalette, Gerard R. Renardel de

doi:10.1093/logcom/14.2.251

Cited by 14 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Often triggered directly by the initial work on dynamic-epistemic logic and sabotage modal logic, many further logics of graph modifiers have been proposed in the recent literature than what we have covered here. Besides the above mentioned series of work [1,3,2,4], relevant systems include local and global graph modifiers [8], dynamic epistemic modifiers [11,10], dynamic modal logic DML [15], arrow logic [31], logics of copy and remove [6], the logic of preference upgrade [51], and general dynamic dynamic logic [25]. 30 Instead of discussing the above terrain in detail, we give a small 'expressiveness map' based on what can readily be observed, and on what authors have claimed.…”

Section: Landscape Of Logics For Model Changementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Modal logics of sabotage revisited

Aucher

Benthem

Grossi

2017

Journal of Logic and Computation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sabotage modal logic was proposed in 2003 as a format for analyzing games that modify graphs they are played on. We investigate some model-theoretic and proof-theoretic aspects of sabotage modal logic, which has come to be viewed as an early dynamic logic of graph change. Our first result is a characterization theorem for sabotage modal logic as a fragment of first-order logic which is invariant with respect to a natural notion of 'sabotage bisimulation'. Next, we offer a sound and complete tableau method and its associated labeled sequent calculus for analyzing reasoning in sabotage modal logic. Finally, we identify and briefly explore a number of open research problems concerning sabotage modal logic that illuminate its complexity, placing it within the current landscape of modal logics that analyze model update, and, returning to the original motivation of sabotage, fixed-point logics for network games.

show abstract

Section: Landscape Of Logics For Model Changementioning

confidence: 99%

“…At the bottom level, there is just basic modal logic, which is expressively equivalent to dynamic modal logic DML (cf. [15]), arrow logic (cf. [31]) and preference upgrade logic (cf.…”

Section: Landscape Of Logics For Model Changementioning

confidence: 99%

Modal logics of sabotage revisited

Aucher

Benthem

Grossi

2017

Journal of Logic and Computation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…7 Therefore, rather than reviewing the update procedures in general terms before applying them to the case at hand, I will define an elimination process that directly fits the needs of the epistemic example. When restricted to this highly specific context, the proposed update coincides with the updates considered in Gerbrandy and Groeneveld [10] and Renardel de Lavalette [19], and in this context it is also equivalent with the update rule described in the public announcement logic of Baltag, Moss, and Solecki [2].…”

Section: Propositions Information and Interpretationmentioning

confidence: 71%

Conditioning and Interpretation Shifts

Romeijn

2012

Stud Logica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. This paper develops a probabilistic model of belief change under interpretation shifts, in the context of a problem case from dynamic epistemic logic. Van Benthem [4] has shown that a particular kind of belief change, typical for dynamic epistemic logic, cannot be modelled by standard Bayesian conditioning. I argue that the problems described by van Benthem come about because the belief change alters the semantics in which the change is supposed to be modelled: the new information induces a shift in the interpretation of the sentences. In this paper I show that interpretation shifts can be modeled in terms of updating by conditioning. The model derives from the knowledge structures developed by Fagin et al [8], and hinges on a distinction between the propositional and informational content of sentences. Finally, I show that Dempster-Shafer theory provides the appropriate probability kinematics for the model.

show abstract

“…AUL is inspired by the arrow precondition language proposed by Renne et al (2009Renne et al ( , 2010; there are also connections to the work of Renardel de Lavalette (2004) and of Aucher et al (2009) on accessibility relation change and to the work of van Benthem (2005) on arbitrary arrow elimination. AUL is inspired by the arrow precondition language proposed by Renne et al (2009Renne et al ( , 2010; there are also connections to the work of Renardel de Lavalette (2004) and of Aucher et al (2009) on accessibility relation change and to the work of van Benthem (2005) on arbitrary arrow elimination.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Arrow Update Logic

Kooi

Renne

2011

The Review of Symbolic Logic

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present Arrow Update Logic, a theory of epistemic access elimination that can be used to reason about multi-agent belief change. While the belief-changing "arrow updates" of Arrow Update Logic can be transformed into equivalent belief-changing "action models" from the popular Dynamic Epistemic Logic approach, we prove that arrow updates are sometimes exponentially more succinct than action models. Further, since many examples of belief change are naturally thought of from Arrow Update Logic's perspective of eliminating access to epistemic possibilities, Arrow Update Logic is a valuable addition to the repertoire of logics of information change. In addition to proving basic results about Arrow Update Logic, we introduce a new notion of common knowledge that generalizes both ordinary common knowledge and the "relativized" common knowledge familiar from the Dynamic Epistemic Logic literature.

show abstract

Changing Modalities

Cited by 14 publications

References 0 publications

Modal logics of sabotage revisited

Modal logics of sabotage revisited

Conditioning and Interpretation Shifts

Arrow Update Logic

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About