Coinductive models and normal forms for modal logics (or how we learned to stop worrying and love coinduction)

Abstract We present a coinductive definition of models for modal logics and show that it provides a homogeneous framework in which it is possible to include different modal languages ranging from classical modalities to operators from hybrid and memory logics. Moreover, results that had to be proved separately for each different language—but whose proofs were known to be mere routine—now can be proved in a general way. We show, for example, that we can have a unique definition of bisimulation for all these languages, and prove a single invariance-under-bisimulation theorem. We then use the new framework to investigate normal forms for modal logics. The normal form we introduce may have a smaller modal depth than the original formula, and it is inspired by global modalities like the universal modality and the satisfiability operator from hybrid logics. These modalities can be extracted from under the scope of other operators. We provide a general definition of extractable modalities and show how to compute extracted normal forms. As it is the case with other classical normal forms—e.g., the conjunctive normal form of propositional logic—the extracted normal form of a formula can be exponentially bigger than the original formula, if we require the two formulas to be equivalent. If we only require equi-satisfiability, then every modal formula has an extracted normal form which is only polynomially bigger than the original formula, and it can be computed in polynomial time.

[1]  Fausto Giunchiglia,et al.  SAT-Based Decision Procedures for Classical Modal Logics , 2004, Journal of Automated Reasoning.

[2]  Jean Goubault-Larrecq,et al.  Normal Form Transformations , 2001, Handbook of Automated Reasoning.

[3]  李幼升,et al.  Ph , 1989 .

[4]  Maarten de Rijke,et al.  Generalized quantifiers and modal logic , 1993, J. Log. Lang. Inf..

[5]  Vyacheslav Aleksandrovich Belonogov Eight papers translated from the Russian , 1989 .

[6]  GiunchigliaFausto,et al.  Building Decision Procedures for Modal Logics from Propositional Decision Procedures , 2000 .

[7]  Balder ten Cate,et al.  Hybrid logics , 2007, Handbook of Modal Logic.

[8]  Richard Spencer-Smith,et al.  Modal Logic , 2007 .

[9]  Fausto Giunchiglia,et al.  A SAT-based Decision Procedure for ALC , 1996, KR.

[10]  Frank Wolter,et al.  Handbook of Modal Logic , 2007, Studies in logic and practical reasoning.

[11]  Linh Anh Nguyen On the Complexity of Fragments of Modal Logics , 2004, Advances in Modal Logic.

[12]  Grigori Mints Resolution calculi for modal logics , 1989 .

[13]  Alexander Kurz,et al.  Coalgebras and their logics , 2006, SIGA.

[14]  Fausto Giunchiglia,et al.  Building Decision Procedures for Modal Logics from Propositional Decision Procedure - The Case Study of Modal K , 1996, CADE.

[15]  Patrice Enjalbert,et al.  Modal Resolution in Clausal Form , 1989, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[16]  Christoph Weidenbach,et al.  Computing Small Clause Normal Forms , 2001, Handbook of Automated Reasoning.

[17]  Peter F. Patel-Schneider,et al.  A New General Method to Generate Random Modal Formulae for Testing Decision Procedures , 2003, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[18]  Richard E. Ladner,et al.  The Computational Complexity of Provability in Systems of Modal Propositional Logic , 1977, SIAM J. Comput..

[19]  Valentin Goranko,et al.  Using the Universal Modality: Gains and Questions , 1992, J. Log. Comput..

[20]  Patrick Brézillon,et al.  Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence , 1999 .

[21]  Peter F. Patel-Schneider,et al.  DLP System Description , 1998, Description Logics.

[22]  J. A. Robinson,et al.  Handbook of Automated Reasoning (in 2 volumes) , 2001 .

[23]  B. T. Cate,et al.  Model theory for extended modal languages , 2005 .

[24]  Santiago Figueira,et al.  Expressive Power and Decidability for Memory Logics , 2008, WoLLIC.