Skip to main content
Log in

Guards, Bounds, and Generalized Semantics

  • Published:
Journal of Logic, Language and Information Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Some initial motivations for the Guarded Fragment still seem of interest in carrying its program further. First, we stress the equivalence between two perspectives: (a) satisfiability on standard models for guarded first-order formulas, and (b) satisfiability on general assignment models for arbitrary first-order formulas. In particular, we give a new straightforward reduction from the former notion to the latter. We also show how a perspective shift to general assignment models provides a new look at the fixed-point extension LFP(FO) of first-order logic, making it decidable. Next, we relate guarded syntax to earlier quantifier restriction strategies for achieving effective axiomatizability in second-order logic – pointing at analogies with ‘persistent’ formulas, which are essentially in the Bounded Fragment of many-sorted first-order logic. Finally, we look at some further unexplored directions, including the systematic use of ‘quasi-models’ as a semantics by itself.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Andréka, H., van Benthem, J., and Németi, I., 1998, “Modal languages and bounded fragments of predicate logic,” Journal of Philosophical Logic 27, 217–274.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andréka, H., Hodkinson, I., and Németi, I., 1999, “Finite algebras of relations are representable on finite sets,” Journal of Symbolic Logic 64, 243–267.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andréka, H., Madarasz, J., and Németi, I., to appear, “Logics of relativistic space-time,” in M. Aiello, J. van Benthem and I. Pratt (eds.), Handbook of Spatial Reasoning, Kluwer-Springer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.

  • Andréka, H. and Németi, I., 2005, private communication.

  • Feferman, S., 1969, “Persistent and invariant formulas for outer extensions,” Compositio Mathematica 20, 29–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grädel, E., 1999A, “Decision procedures for guarded logics,” in Automated Deduction – Proceedings CADE 16, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 1632, Springer Verlag, Berlin, 31–51.

  • Grädel, E., 1999B, “On the restraining power of guards,” Journal of Symbolic Logic 64, 1719-1742.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grädel, E., 1999C, “The decidability of guarded fixed point logic,” in J. Gerbrandy, M. Marx, M. de Rijke, and Y. Venema (eds.), JFAK Essays Dedicated to Johan van Benthem on the Occasion of his 50th Birthday, CD-ROM http://turing.wins.uva.nl/~j50/cdrom/, Amsterdam University Press.

  • Hoogland, E. and Marx, M., 2002, “Interpolation and definability in guarded fragments,” Studia Logica 70, 373–409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoogland, E., Marx, M., and Otto, M., 1999, “Beth definability for the guarded fragment,” in H. Ganzinger, D. McAllester, and A. Voronkov (eds.), Logic for Programming and Automated Reasoning, LPAR 6, Springer Lecture Notes in AI 1705, 273–285, Springer, Berlin.

  • Kerdiles, G., 2001, Saying it with Pictures: A Logical Landscape of Conceptual Graphs, Dissertation DS-2001-09, Institute for Logic, Language and Computation, University of Amsterdam.

  • Marx, M., 2001, “Tolerance logic,” Journal of Logic, Language and Information 10, 353–373.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marx, M. and Venema, Y., 1997, Multi-Dimensional Modal Logic, Kluwer, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montague, R., 1970, “Pragmatics and intensional logic,” Synthese 22, 68–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Németi, I., 1985, “Cylindric-relativized set algebras have strong amalgamation,” Journal of Symbolic Logic 50(3), 689–700.

    Google Scholar 

  • Németi, I., 1995, “Decidability of weakened versions of first-order logic,” in Logic Colloquium 92, CSLI Publications, Stanford, pp. 177–241.

    Google Scholar 

  • Németi, I., 1996, “Fine-structure analysis of first-order logic,” in M. Marx, M. Masuch, and L. Pólos (eds.), Arrow Logic and Multi-Modal Logic, CSLI Publications, Stanford, 221–247.

    Google Scholar 

  • ten Cate, B., 2005, Model Theory for Extended Modal Languages, Dissertation, Institute for Logic, Language and Computation, University of Amsterdam.

  • van Benthem, J., 1983, Modal Logic and Classical Logic, Bibliopolis, Napoli.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Benthem, J., 1996A, “Complexity of contents versus complexity of wrappings,” in M. Marx, M. Masuch, and L. Pólos (eds.), Arrow Logic and Multimodal Logic, Studies in Logic, Language and Information, CSLI Publications, Stanford and Cambridge University Press, 203–219.

  • van Benthem, J., 1996B, Exploring Logical Dynamics, CSLI Publications, Stanford.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Benthem, J., 1997, “Dynamic bits and pieces,” Report LP-97-01, Institute for Logic, Language and Computation, University of Amsterdam.

  • van Benthem, J., 1999, “The range of modal logic,” Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics 9(2/3), 407–442.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Benthem, J., 2001, “Modal logic in two gestalts,” in M. de Rijke, H. Wansing and M. Zakharyashev (eds.), Advances in Modal Logic, Vol. II, Uppsala 1998, CSLI Publications, Stanford, 73–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • van der Hoek, W. and de Rijke, M., 1993, “Generalized quantifiers and modal logic,” Journal of Logic, Language, and Information 2, 19–50.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

van Benthem, J. Guards, Bounds, and Generalized Semantics. J Logic Lang Inf 14, 263–279 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10849-005-5786-y

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10849-005-5786-y

Keywords

Navigation