Inquisitive dynamic epistemic logic

Ciardelli, Ivano; Roelofsen, Floris

doi:10.1007/s11229-014-0404-7

Cited by 73 publications

(88 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The dynamic variant of IEL, called IDEL (Ciardelli and Roelofsen 2015;Ciardelli 2016), extends IEL with public announcements, analogous to the way PAL extends standard epistemic logic (Plaza 1989). The novelty of IDEL is that both questions and statements can be announced.…”

Section: Dynamicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The static systems IEL and ELQ, which form the basis of AMLI and ELQm, respectively, have already been compared extensively in Ciardelli and Roelofsen (2015). The most important differences, as I mentioned in the introduction, are the notion of issues, which is strictly more general in IEL, and the way questions enter the logical system.…”

Section: Comparing Amli With Elqmmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Two prominent approaches are the Dynamic Logic of Questions (DELQ, van Benthem and Minicȃ 2012;Minicȃ 2011) and Inquisitive Dynamic Epistemic Logic (IDEL, Ciardelli and Roelofsen 2015;Ciardelli 2016). These systems are generalizations of Public Announcement Logic (PAL, Plaza 1989): they are used to reason about epistemic events of which all agents are fully aware.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Action models in inquisitive logic

Gessel

2018

Synthese

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Information exchange can be viewed as a process of asking questions and answering them. While dynamic epistemic logic traditionally focuses on statements, recent developments have been concerned with ways of incorporating questions. One approach, based on the framework of inquisitive semantics, is inquisitive dynamic epistemic logic (IDEL). In this system, agents are represented with issues as well as information. On the dynamic level, it can model actions that raise new issues. Compared to other approaches, a limitation of IDEL is that it can only encode public announcements. IDEL can be refined to encode private questions, by merging its static basis, inquisitive epistemic logic (IEL), with action model logic (AML). This can be done in two ways, namely by enriching action models with questions as possible actions or with issues concerning which action takes place. This paper describes the corresponding dynamic logics, which are conservative extensions of both AML and IEL, and a sound and complete axiomatization is given for both.

show abstract

Section: Dynamicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Comparing Amli With Elqmmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Action models in inquisitive logic

Gessel

2018

Synthese

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…On the one hand, inquisitive semantics provides a framework in which declarative and interrogative clauses can be given a uniform analysis; on the other hand, by refining the notion of meaning, it also allows for a more fine-grained analysis of the semantics of some operators, such as disjunction. These features have been fruitfully exploited in recent work, both in linguistics (a.o., AnderBois 2012AnderBois , 2014Coppock & Brochhagen 2013;Szabolcsi 2015;Roelofsen & Farkas 2015;Theiler, Roelofsen & Aloni 2016), and in logic (a.o., Ciardelli & Roelofsen 2015b;Ciardelli 2016). …”

Section: Inquisitive Semanticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lifting conditionals to inquisitive semantics

Ciardelli

2016

SALT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper describes how any theory which assigns propositions to conditional sentences can be lifted to the setting of inquisitive semantics, where antecedents and consequents may be associated with multiple propositions. We show that the lifted account improves on the original account in two ways: first, it leads to a better analysis of disjunctive antecedents, which are treated as introducing multiple assumptions; second, it extends the original account to cover two further classes of conditional constructions, namely, unconditionals and conditional questions.

show abstract

“…Here, by contrast, we will provide an explicit canonical model construction. This strategy has the merit of generalizing to extensions of the language, such as inquisitive epistemic logic [6], for which a reduction strategy would not be viable [2].…”

Section: Theorem 2 (Resolution Theorem) φ ψ ⇐⇒ For All γ ∈ R(φ) Thermentioning

confidence: 99%

Interrogative Dependencies and the Constructive Content of Inquisitive Proofs

Ciardelli

2014

Logic, Language, Information, and Computation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. This paper shows how dichotomous inquisitive semantics gives rise to a general notion of entailment that unifies standard declarative entailment with answerhood and interrogative dependency, the relation holding when an answer to a question determines an answer to another. We investigate the associated logic, presenting a new completeness proof based on an explicit canonical model construction. On the way to this proof, we establish a new result, the resolution theorem, which shows that inquisitive proofs have a natural computational interpretation. We conclude arguing that, as a logic of dependencies, inquisitive logic has certain theoretical and practical advantages over related systems.

show abstract

Inquisitive dynamic epistemic logic

Cited by 73 publications

References 45 publications

Action models in inquisitive logic

Action models in inquisitive logic

Lifting conditionals to inquisitive semantics

Interrogative Dependencies and the Constructive Content of Inquisitive Proofs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About