Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Set-theoretic completeness for epistemic and conditional logic

  • Published:
Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The standard approach to logic in the literature in philosophy and mathematics, which has also been adopted in computer science, is to define a language (the syntax), an appropriate class of models together with an interpretation of formulas in the language (the semantics), a collection of axioms and rules of inference characterizing reasoning (the proof theory), and then relate the proof theory to the semantics via soundness and completeness results. Here we consider an approach that is more common in the economics literature, which works purely at the semantic, set-theoretic level. We provide set-theoretic completeness results for a number of epistemic and conditional logics, and contrast the expressive power of the syntactic and set-theoretic approaches.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

  1. R.J. Aumann, Notes on interactive epistemology, Working paper, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics (1989).

  2. J.L. Bell and A.B. Slomson, Models and Ultraproducts: An Introduction (3rd revised ed.) (North-Holland/American Elsevier, Amsterdam/New York, 1974).

    Google Scholar 

  3. C. Boutilier, Conditional logics of normality: a modal approach, Artificial Intelligence 68 (1994) 87-154.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  4. J. Burgess, Quick completeness proofs for some logics of conditionals, Notre Dame J. Formal Logic 22 (1981) 76-84.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  5. E.M. Clarke, E.A. Emerson and A.P. Sistla, Automatic verification of finite-state concurrent systems using temporal logic specifications, ACM Trans. Programming Languages Systems 8(2) (1986) 244-263. An early version appeared in: Proc. 10th ACM Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages (1983).

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. R. Fagin, J.Y. Halpern and N. Megiddo, A logic for reasoning about probabilities, Inform. Comput. 87(1/2) (1990) 78-128.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. R. Fagin, J.Y. Halpern, Y. Moses and M.Y. Vardi, Reasoning about Knowledge (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1995).

    Google Scholar 

  8. N. Friedman and J.Y. Halpern, On the complexity of conditional logics, in: Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proc. 4th International Conference (KR '94) (Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, CA, 1994) pp. 202-213.

    Google Scholar 

  9. N. Friedman and J.Y. Halpern, Plausibility measures and default reasoning, J. ACM (1998). Accepted for publication. Also available at http://www.cs.cornell.edu/home/halpern.

  10. N. Friedman, J.Y. Halpern and D. Koller, Conditional first-order logic revisited, in: Proceedings 13th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI '96) (1996) pp. 1305-1312.

  11. J.Y. Halpern, An analysis of first-order logics of probability, Artificial Intelligence 46 (1990) 311-350.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  12. J.Y. Halpern, Defining relative likelihood in partially-ordered preferential structures, J. AI Res. 7 (1997) 1-24.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. J.Y. Halpern and M.Y. Vardi, Model checking vs. theorem proving: a manifesto, in: Artificial Intelligence and Mathematical Theory of Computation (Papers in Honor of John McCarthy), ed. V. Lifschitz (Academic Press, San Diego, CA, 1991) pp. 151-176.

    Google Scholar 

  14. J. Hintikka, Knowledge and Belief (Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY, 1962).

    Google Scholar 

  15. S. Kraus, D. Lehmann and M. Magidor, Nonmonotonic reasoning, preferential models and cumulative logics, Artificial Intelligence 44 (1990) 167-207.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  16. D.K. Lewis, Counterfactuals (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1973).

    Google Scholar 

  17. P. Milgrom, An axiomatic characterization of common knowledge, Econometrica 49(1) (1981) 219-222.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. J. Pearl, Causation, action, and counterfactuals, in: Computational Learning and Probabilistic Reasoning, ed. A. Gammerman (Wiley, New York, 1995) pp. 235-255.

    Google Scholar 

  19. R.C. Stalnaker, A theory of conditionals, in: Studies in Logical Theory, ed. N. Rescher, American Philosophical Quarterly Monograph Series, Vol. 2 (Blackwell, Oxford, 1968). Also appears in Ifs, eds. W.L. Harper, R.C. Stalnaker and G. Pearce (Reidel, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1981).

    Google Scholar 

  20. R.C. Stalnaker, Notes on conditional semantics, in: Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning about Knowledge: Proc. 4th Conference, ed. Y. Moses (Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, CA, 1992) pp. 316-328.

    Google Scholar 

  21. R.C. Stalnaker and R. Thomason, A semantical analysis of conditional logic, Theoria 36 (1970) 246-281.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, 14853, USA

    Joseph Y. Halpern

Authors
  1. Joseph Y. Halpern
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Halpern, J.Y. Set-theoretic completeness for epistemic and conditional logic. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 26, 1–27 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018942425200

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018942425200

Keywords

Search

Navigation