Free Quantified Epistemic Logics

Corsi, Giovanna; Orlandelli, Eugenio

doi:10.1007/s11225-013-9528-x

Cited by 17 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…¬Rc, 0 occurs on our branch above, while B x 1 Dx 2 [c, c/x 1 , x 2 ], 0 (that is, B c Dc, 0) does not occur on this 3. However, see Fitting et al (2001) and Corsi and Orlandelli (2013). 4.…”

Section: Examples Of Derivations In Our Systems the Unmarried Teachementioning

confidence: 99%

Doxastic logic: a new approach

Rönnedal

2018

Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, I develop a new set of doxastic logical systems and I show how they can be used to solve several well-known problems in doxastic logic, for example the so-called problem of logical omniscience. According to this puzzle, the notions of knowledge and belief that are used in ordinary epistemic and doxastic symbolic systems are too idealised. Hence, those systems cannot be used to model ordinary human or human-like agents' beliefs. At best, they can describe idealised individuals. The systems in this paper can be used to symbolise not only the doxastic states of perfectly rational individuals, but also the beliefs of finite humans (and human-like agents). Proof-theoretically, I will use a tableau technique. Every system is combined with predicate logic with necessary identity and 'possibilist' quantifiers and modal logic with two kinds of modal operators for relative and absolute necessity. The semantics is a possible world semantics. Finally, I prove that every tableau system in the paper is sound and complete with respect to its semantics.

show abstract

Section: Examples Of Derivations In Our Systems the Unmarried Teachementioning

confidence: 99%

Doxastic logic: a new approach

Rönnedal

2018

Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, agents cannot have uncertainty about each other's identity. A natural extension is to allow (implicit) quantification over agents (Corsi, 2002;Corsi and Orlandelli, 2013;Corsi and Tassi, 2014), where different readings of a quantified modal formula can also be disambiguated. Another quantifying-over-agent approach appears in the context of rough sets with multiple sources (as agents) by Khan and Banerjee (2010).…”

Section: Recent Technical Advances Of Quantified Epistemic Logicmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond Knowing That: A New Generation of Epistemic Logics

Wang

2018

Jaakko Hintikka on Knowledge and Game-Theoretical Semantics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Epistemic logic has become a major field of philosophical logic ever since the groundbreaking work by Hintikka (1962). Despite its various successful applications in theoretical computer science, AI, and game theory, the technical development of the field has been mainly focusing on the propositional part, i.e., the propositional modal logics of "knowing that". However, knowledge is expressed in everyday life by using various other locutions such as "knowing whether", "knowing what", "knowing how" and so on (knowing-wh hereafter). Such knowledge expressions are better captured in quantified epistemic logic, as was already discussed by Hintikka (1962) and his sequel works at length. This paper aims to draw the attention back again to such a fascinating but largely neglected topic. We first survey what Hintikka and others did in the literature of quantified epistemic logic, and then advocate a new quantifier-free approach to study the epistemic logics of knowing-wh, which we believe can balance expressivity and complexity, and capture the essential reasoning patterns about knowing-wh. We survey our recent line of work on the epistemic logics of 'knowing whether", "knowing what" and "knowing how" to demonstrate the use of this new approach.2 Hintikka was never happy with the term "possible worlds", since in his models there may be no "worlds" but only situations or states, which are partial descriptions of the worlds. However, in this paper we will still use the term "possible worlds" for convenience. 3 How is in general also considered as a wh-question word, besides what, when, where, who, whom, which, whose, and why. 4 The "knows X" search term can exclude the phrases such as "you know what" and count only the statements, while "know X" may appear in questions as well.

show abstract

“…On the other hand, a may not know that 'b' is the name of the maintenance robot, thus merely knowing b knows a needs help is not enough for a to be sure it will be helped. The authors of [4] list several possible readings of (⋆), which we will elaborate as follows: a, the broken robot, knows that (i) the robot named 'b' knows that the robot named 'a' needs help, or (ii) the robot named 'b' knows that it, i.e. the broken robot, needs help, or (iii) the maintenance robot knows that the robot named 'a' needs help, or (iv) the maintenance robot knows that it, i.e.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is impossible to distinguish the above readings in standard epistemic logic. In the literature [8,7,4,5,11], various approaches are proposed. In [7], Grove correctly pinpoints the problems of scope and manner of reference in giving various de re /de dicto readings for higher-order knowledge, and proposes a new semantics for 2-sorted first-order modal logic that is based on world-agent pairs, so as to cope with indexicals like "me".…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

When Names Are Not Commonly Known: Epistemic Logic with Assignments

Wang,

Seligman

2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In standard epistemic logic, agent names are usually assumed to be common knowledge implicitly. This is unreasonable for various applications. Inspired by term modal logic and assignment operators in dynamic logic, we introduce a lightweight modal predicate logic where names can be non-rigid. The language can handle various de dicto /de re distinctions in a natural way. The main technical result is a complete axiomatisation of this logic over S5 models.

show abstract

Free Quantified Epistemic Logics

Cited by 17 publications

References 17 publications

Doxastic logic: a new approach

Doxastic logic: a new approach

Beyond Knowing That: A New Generation of Epistemic Logics

When Names Are Not Commonly Known: Epistemic Logic with Assignments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About