Inverse images of box formulas in modal logic
type: Item
instance of: scholarly article
title: Inverse images of box formulas in modal logic
zbMATH Open document ID: 1309.03008
author: Lloyd Humberstone
published in: Studia Logica
publication date: 2013-12-05T00:00:00Z
review text: The paper investigates some properties of modal logics that do not have the cancellation rule ``from \(\square A \leftrightarrow \square B\) infer \(A \leftrightarrow B\)''. The latter is the converse of the congruence rule (alias the rule of equivalents) ``from \(A \leftrightarrow B\) infer \(\square A \leftrightarrow \square B\)''. When the congruence rule is admissible -- as is the case, e.g. in the basic modal logic \(\mathsf{K}\) -- then for a given formula \(A\), every formula \(B\) such that \(\square A\) is logically equivalent to \(\square B\) must be logically equivalent to \(A\). This is not necessarily the case for logics where the cancellation rule is not admissible. It makes therefore sense to define the \textit{inverse image} of \(A\) in logic \(\mathsf{S}\), noted \(\square^{{-}1}[A]^{\mathsf{S}}\), as the set of all \(B\) such that \(\square B\) is logically equivalent to \(\square A\) in \(\mathsf{S}\). The paper investigates the properties of that set. It is shown that (1) for some \(\mathsf{S}\) such as \(\mathsf{K}\), \(\square^{{-}1}[A]^{\mathsf{S}}\) is a singleton up to logical equivalence; (2) for some \(\mathsf{S}\) such as \(\mathsf{S4}\), each \(\square^{{-}1}[A]^{\mathsf{S}}\) has elements that are logically strongest up to logical equivalence (such as \(\square B\) in the case of \(\mathsf{S4}\)); (3) for some \(\mathsf{S}\), each \(\square^{{-}1}[A]^{\mathsf{S}}\) has elements that are logically strongest and elements that are logically weakest, up to logical equivalence; (4) for some \(\mathsf{S}\) such as \(\mathsf{KD45}\), there are formulas \(A\) such that \(\square^{{-}1}[A]^{\mathsf{S}}\) has neither strongest nor weakest elements. It is also shown that there are logics such as \(\mathsf{KT}\) where there is no general result: while \(\square^{{-}1}[\square p]^{\mathsf{KT}}\) contains logically strongest and weakest formulas, this does not necessarily hold when the propositional variable \(p\) is replaced by a complex formula.
Mathematics Subject Classification ID: 03B45
zbMATH DE Number: 6235907
zbMATH Keywords: modal logic
zbMATH Keywords: inverses of modal operators
MaRDI profile type: Publication
full work available at URL: s11225-012-9419-6
OpenAlex ID: W2075105764
cites work: Q3509046
cites work: Hallden-completeness by gluing of Kripke frames
cites work: Q3867808
cites work: Q4845472
cites work: A logical analysis of some value concepts
cites work: On a side effect of solving Fitch's paradox by typing knowledge
cites work: Should knowledge entail belief?
cites work: Moorean phenomena in epistemic logic
cites work: The modal logic of agreement and noncontingency
cites work: Q3629240
cites work: Collapsing modalities
cites work: Q3093482
cites work: Q3185648
cites work: Inverses for normal modal operators
cites work: Q3409073
cites work: Two incomplete anti-realist modal epistemic logics
cites work: New essays on the knowability paradox.
cites work: Q3952081
cites work: Q3832540
cites work: Relative necessity
cites work: Self-reference and modal logic
cites work: A counterexample in tense logic
cites work: Embeddings of propositional monomodal logics
DOI: 10.1007/S11225-012-9419-6
description: scientific article; zbMATH DE number 6235907