2011
DOI: 10.1007/s10849-011-9152-y
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Sequential Dynamic Logic

Abstract: We introduce a substructural propositional calculus of Sequential Dynamic Logic that subsumes a propositional part of dynamic predicate logic, and is shown to be expressively equivalent to propositional dynamic logic. Completeness of the calculus with respect to the intended relational semantics is established.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

1
1
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
2
1

Relationship

1
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
1
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The scope of the present paper is also more general than those of [12] and [24]. We also strengthen the following relational completeness results: (i) Bochman and Gabbay [1] formulate a sequent system (generalizing Kozen and Tiuryn's [18] substructural logic of partial correctness S) that is sound and complete with respect to a fragment of the equational theory of relational aKAT, (ii) Hollenberg [11] gives an axiomatization of the equational theory of * -free relational aKAT, and (iii) McLean [20] (based on the work of Mbacke [19]) establishes a relational completeness result for * -free relational dKA.…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 81%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The scope of the present paper is also more general than those of [12] and [24]. We also strengthen the following relational completeness results: (i) Bochman and Gabbay [1] formulate a sequent system (generalizing Kozen and Tiuryn's [18] substructural logic of partial correctness S) that is sound and complete with respect to a fragment of the equational theory of relational aKAT, (ii) Hollenberg [11] gives an axiomatization of the equational theory of * -free relational aKAT, and (iii) McLean [20] (based on the work of Mbacke [19]) establishes a relational completeness result for * -free relational dKA.…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 81%
“…In contrast to KA and KAT, completeness and complexity results for their extensions with dynamic tests are largely missing. 1 We fill this gap by proving relational completeness and (parametrized) guarded-language completeness results for dKA (KA with domain), aKA (KA with both domain and antidomain), dKAT (KAT with domain) and aKAT (KAT with both domain and antidomain), and EXPTIMEcompleteness results for aKAT and aKA.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%