added

**2 research items**Updates

0 new

0

Recommendations

0 new

0

Followers

0 new

25

Reads

0 new

297

Non-classical logics are used in a wide spectrum of disciplines, including artificial intelligence, computer science, mathematics, and philosophy. The de-facto standard infrastructure for automated theorem proving, the TPTP World, currently supports only classical logics. This paper describes the latest extension of the TPTP World, providing languages and infrastructure for reasoning in non-classical logics. The extension integrates seamlessly with the existing TPTP World.

A shallow semantical embedding for public announcement logic with relativized common knowledge is presented. This embedding enables the first-time automation of this logic with off-the-shelf theorem provers for classical higher-order logic. It is demonstrated (i) how meta-theoretical studies can be automated this way, and (ii) how non-trivial reasoning in the target logic (public announcement logic), required e.g. to obtain a convincing encoding and automation of the wise men puzzle, can be realized.
Key to the presented semantical embedding is that evaluation domains are modeled explicitly and treated as an additional parameter in the encodings of the constituents of the embedded target logic; in previous related works, e.g. on the embedding of normal modal logics, evaluation domains were implicitly shared between meta-logic and target logic.
The work presented in this article constitutes an important addition to the pluralist LogiKEy knowledge engineering methodology, which enables experimentation with logics and their combinations, with general and domain knowledge, and with concrete use cases -- all at the same time.

We encode a topological semantics for paraconsistent and paracomplete logics enriched with recovery operators, by drawing upon early works on topological Boolean algebras (by Kuratowski, Zarycki, McKinsey & Tarski, etc.). This work exemplarily illustrates the shallow semantical embedding approach using Isabelle/HOL and shows how we can effectively harness theorem provers, model finders and "hammers" for reasoning with quantified non-classical logics.

Free logics are a family of logics that are free of any existential assumptions. Unlike traditional classical and non-classical logics, they support an elegant modeling of nonexistent objects and partial functions as relevant for a wide range of applications in computer science, philosophy, mathematics, and natural language semantics. While free first-order logic has been addressed in the literature, free higher-order logic has not been studied thoroughly so far. The contribution of this paper includes (i) the development of a notion and definition of free higher-order logic in terms of a positive semantics (partly inspired by Farmer’s partial functions version of Church’s simple type theory), (ii) the provision of a faithful shallow semantical embedding of positive free higher-order logic into classical higher-order logic, (iii) the implementation of this embedding in the Isabelle/HOL proof-assistant, and (iv) the exemplary application of our novel reasoning framework for an automated assessment of Prior’s paradox in positive free quantified propositional logics, i.e., a fragment of positive free higher-order logic.

A shallow semantical embedding for public announcement logic with relativized common knowledge is presented. This embedding enables the first-time automation of this logic with off-the-shelf theorem provers for classical higher-order logic. It is demonstrated (i) how meta-theoretical studies can be automated this way, and (ii) how non-trivial reasoning in the target logic (public announcement logic), required e.g., to obtain a convincing encoding and automation of the wise men puzzle, can be realized. Key to the presented semantical embedding—in contrast, e.g., to related work on the semantical embedding of normal modal logics—is that evaluation domains are modeled explicitly and treated as additional parameter in the encodings of the constituents of the embedded target logic, while they were previously implicitly shared between meta logic and target logic.

A shallow semantical embedding for public announcement logic with relativized common knowledge is presented. This embedding enables the first-time automation of this logic with off-the-shelf theorem provers for classical higher-order logic. It is demonstrated (i) how meta-theoretical studies can be automated this way, and (ii) how non-trivial reasoning in the target logic (public announcement logic), required e.g. to obtain a convincing encoding and automation of the wise men puzzle, can be realized. Key to the presented semantical embedding-in contrast , e.g., to related work on the semantical embedding of normal modal logics-is that evaluation domains are modeled explicitly and treated as additional parameter in the encodings of the constituents of the embedded target logic, while they were previously implicitly shared between meta logic and target logic.

Free logics are a family of logics that are free of any exis-tential assumptions. Unlike traditional classical and non-classical logics, they support an elegant modeling of nonexistent objects and partial functions as relevant for a wide range of applications in computer science, philosophy , mathematics, and natural language semantics. While free first-order logic has been addressed in the literature, free higher-order logic has not been studied thoroughly so far. The contribution of this paper includes (i) the development of a notion and definition of free higher-order logic in terms of a positive semantics (partly inspired by Farmer's partial functions version of Church's simple type theory), (ii) the provision of a faithful shallow semantical embedding of positive free higher-order logic into classical higher-order logic, (iii) the implementation of this embedding in the Isabelle/HOL proof-assistant, and (iv) the exemplary application of our novel reasoning framework for an automated assessment of Prior's paradox in positive free quantified propositional logics, i.e., a fragment of positive free higher-order logic.

Climate Engineering (CE) is the intentional large-scale intervention in the Earth's climate system to counter climate change. CE is highly controversial, spurring global debates about whether and under what conditions it should be considered. We focus on the computer-supported analysis of a small subset of the arguments pro and contra CE interventions as presented in the work of Betz and Cacean (2012), namely those drawing on the "ethics of risk"; these arguments point out uncertainties in future deployment of CE technologies. The aim of this paper is to demonstrate and explain the application of higher-order interactive and automated theorem proving (utilising shallow semantical embeddings) to the logical analysis of "real-life" argumentative discourse.

A modeloid, a certain set of partial bijections, emerges from the idea to abstract from a structure to the set of its partial automor-phisms. It comes with an operation, called the derivative, which is inspired by Ehrenfeucht-Fra¨ısséFra¨ıssé games. In this paper we develop a generalization of a modeloid first to an inverse semigroup and then to an inverse category using an axiomatic approach to category theory. We then show that this formulation enables a purely algebraic view on Ehrenfeucht-Fra¨ısséFra¨ıssé games.

A modeloid, a certain set of partial bijections, emerges from the idea to abstract from a structure to the set of its partial automor-phisms. It comes with an operation, called the derivative, which is inspired by Ehrenfeucht-Fraisse games. In this paper we develop a generalization of a modeloid first to an inverse semigroup and then to an inverse category using an axiomatic approach to category theory. We then show that this formulation enables a purely algebraic view on Ehrenfeucht-Fraisse games.

Computers may help us to better understand (not just verify) arguments. In this article we defend this claim by showcasing the application of a new, computer-assisted interpretive method to an exemplary natural-language argument with strong ties to metaphysics and religion: E. J. Lowe’s modern variant of St. Anselm’s ontological argument for the existence of God. Our new method, which we call computational hermeneutics, has been particularly conceived for use in interactive-automated proof assistants. It aims at shedding light on the meanings of words and sentences by framing their inferential role in a given argument. By employing automated theorem reasoning technology within interactive proof assistants, we are able to drastically reduce (by several orders of magnitude) the time needed to test the logical validity of an argument’s formalization. As a result, a new approach to logical analysis, inspired by Donald Davidson’s account of radical interpretation, has been enabled. In computational hermeneutics, the utilization of automated reasoning tools effectively boosts our capacity to expose the assumptions we indirectly commit ourselves to every time we engage in rational argumentation and it fosters the explicitation and revision of our concepts and commitments.

We present a computer-supported approach for the logical analysis and conceptual explicitation of argumentative discourse. Computational hermeneutics harnesses recent progresses in automated reasoning for higher-order logics and aims at formalizing natural-language argumentative discourse using flexible combinations of expressive non-classical logics. In doing so, it allows us to render explicit the tacit con-ceptualizations implicit in argumentative discursive practices. Our approach operates on networks of structured arguments and is iterative and two-layered. At one layer we search for logically correct formaliza-tions for each of the individual arguments. At the next layer we select among those correct formalizations the ones which honor the argument's dialectic role, i.e. attacking or supporting other arguments as intended. We operate at these two layers in parallel and continuously rate sen-tences' formalizations by using, primarily, inferential adequacy criteria. An interpretive, logical theory will thus gradually evolve. This theory is composed of meaning postulates serving as explications for concepts playing a role in the analyzed arguments. Such a recursive, iterative approach to interpretation does justice to the inherent circularity of understanding: the whole is understood compositionally on the basis of its parts, while each part is understood only in the context of the whole (hermeneutic circle). We summarily discuss previous work on exemplary applications of human-in-the-loop computational hermeneutics in metaphysical discourse. We also discuss some of the main challenges involved in fully-automating our approach. By sketching some design ideas and reviewing relevant technologies, we argue for the technological feasibility of a highly-automated computational hermeneutics.

The quest for a most general framework supporting universal reasoning is very prominently represented in the works of Leibniz. He envisioned a scientia generalis founded on a characteristica universalis, that is, a most universal formal language in which all knowledge about the world and the sciences can be encoded. A quick study of the survey literature on logical formalisms suggests that quite the opposite to Leibniz’ dream has become reality. Instead of a characteristica universalis, we are today facing a very rich and heterogenous zoo of different logical systems, and instead of converging towards a single superior logic, this logic zoo is further expanding, eventually even at accelerated pace. As a consequence, the unified vision of Leibniz seems farther away than ever before. However, there are also some promising initiatives to counteract these diverging developments. Attempts at unifying approaches to logic include categorial logic algebraic logic and coalgebraic logic.

Classical higher-order logic, when utilized as a meta-logic in which various other (classical and non-classical) logics can be shallowly embedded, is suitable as a foundation for the development of a universal logical reasoning engine. Such an engine may be employed, as already envisioned by Leibniz, to support the rigorous formalisation and deep logical analysis of rational arguments on the computer. A respective universal logical reasoning framework is described in this article and a range of successful first applications in philosophy, artificial intelligence and mathematics are surveyed.
DOI: 10.1016/j.scico.2018.10.008