About the Complete Axiomatization of Dynamic Extensions of Arrow Logic
This paper is devoted to the proof of the completeness of deductive systems for dynamic extensions of arrow logic. These extensions are based on the relational constructs of composition and intersection. The proof of the completeness of our deductive systems uses the canonical model construction and the subordination model construction.
KeywordsInformation logics Arrow logics Dynamic logics Axiomatization and Completeness
Special acknowledgement is heartly granted to Ewa Orłowska. Her research on rough set analysis, her use of modal logic as a general tool for the formalization of reasoning about incomplete information, the multifarious papers that she has written on that subject, her papers introducing modal logics such as DAL and NIL have exerted a profound influence on my research and a great deal of it was directly motivated and influenced by her ideas.
- Arsov, A. (1993). Completeness Theorems for Some Extensions of Arrow Logic (Master’s Dissertation, Sofia University).Google Scholar
- Arsov, A. & Marx, M. (1993). Basic arrow logic with relation algebraic operators. In P. de Dekker & M. Stokhof (Eds.), Proceedings of the 9th Amsterdam Colloquium (pp. 93–112). Amsterdam University, Institute for Logic, Language and Computation.Google Scholar
- Balbiani, P. (2003). Eliminating unorthodox derivation rules in an axiom system for iteration-free PDL with intersection. Fundamenta Informaticae, 56(3), 211–242.Google Scholar
- Balbiani, P. & Vakarelov, D. (2001). Iteration-free PDL with intersection: A complete axiomatization. Fundamenta Informaticae45(3), 173–194.Google Scholar
- Demri, S. (2000). The nondeterministic information logic NIL is PSpace-complete. Fundamenta Informaticae, 42(3–4), 211–234.Google Scholar
- Hughes, G. & Cresswell, M. (1984). A Companion to Modal Logic. Methuen and Co.Google Scholar
- Marx, M. (1995). Algebraic Relativization and Arrow Logic (Doctoral Dissertation, Amsterdam University).Google Scholar
- Orłowska, E. (1985a). Logic of indiscernibility relations. In A. Skowron (Ed.), Proceedings of Computation Theory with 5th Symposium, 1984 (Vol. 208, pp. 177–186). Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Zaborów, Poland: Springer.Google Scholar
- Orłowska, E. (1988). Kripke models with relative accessibility and their application to inferences from incomplete information. In G. Mirkowska & H. Rasiowa (Eds.), Mathematical Problems in Computation Theory (Vol. 21, pp. 329–339). Banach Centre Publications.Google Scholar
- Vakarelov, D. (1992). A modal theory of arrows: Arrow logics I. In D. Pearce & G. Wagner (Eds.), Proceedings of Logics in AI, European Workshop, JELIA ’92 (Vol. 633, pp. 1–24). Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Berlin, Germany: Springer.Google Scholar
- Vakarelov, D. (1996). Many-dimensional arrow structures Arrow logics II. In M. Marx, L. Pólos, & M. Masuch (Eds.), Arrow Logic and Multi-modal Logic (pp. 141–187). Studies in Logic, Language and Information. Amsterdam: Center for the Study of Language and Information.Google Scholar