M. Fitting, M. and Mendelsohn, R. First Order Modal Logic, Kluwer, Dordrecht, 1998. Home/Search Document Not in Database Summary Related Articles Check |
This paper is cited in the following contexts:
Disjunction and Modular Goal-directed Proof Search - Stone (Correct)
.... et al. 1993, Baldoni et al. 1996, Baldoni et al. 1998b] I use prefix terms for worlds and sequent calculus inference, following the comprehensive treatment of the first order modal logic using prefix terms and analytic tableaux (or, seen upside down, in the cut free sequent calculus) of [Fitting and Mendelsohn, 1998]. I factor out reasoning about accessibility into side conditions on inference rules, similar to the proof theoretic view of [Basin et al. 1998] in which reasoning about accessibility and boolean reasoning are clearly distinguished. And I use Herbrand terms to reason correctly about ....
....1994] It is convenient to prove an intermediate result, using slightly modified sequent calculus SCE which imposes an eigenvariable condition on the possibility and existential rules u must be new. We can show the soundness of SCE by adapting the arguments presented in [Fitting, 1983, 2. 3] and [Fitting and Mendelsohn, 1998, 5.3] Meanwhile, we can follow [Fitting, 1983] in developing the completeness argument in terms of analytic consistency properties for the modal language. This argument can be seen as a formalization of the motivation for sequent calculi in the systematic search for models. Now, modal formulas ....
Fitting, M. and Mendelsohn, R. L. (1998). First-order Modal Logic, volume 277 of Synthese Library. Kluwer, Dordrecht.
A General Theorem Prover for Quantified Modal Logics - Thion, Cerrito, Mayer (Correct)
.... with no annotation or as f , f , The language of a tableau includes also annotated free variables, v 2 , and annotated The reader will recognize that this approach to the interpretation of non rigid functional symbols corresponds to the narrow scope approach discussed in [8]. Skolem functional symbols. Skolem functions and annotated functional symbols are considered as rigid symbols. The initial tableau for a set S of formulae is 1 : S # , where S # is obtained from S by annotating rigid symbols with 0 and non modal occurrences of non rigid symbols with 1 where ....
M. Fitting and R Mendelsohn. First-Order Modal Logic. Kluwer, 1998.
Tableaux for Quantified Hybrid Logic - Patrick Blackburn And (2002) (Correct)
....to the language. This will only be defined for variables ranging over individuals. Thus we only add a piece of syntactic sugar. The expressive power of the language remains the same, it is just first order logic. For a thorough introduction to real predicate abstraction in modal logic we refer to [6]. Suppose # is a first order formula and x a first order variable. Then is a predicate abstract. Its free variable occurrences are the free variable occurrences of # except for x. Predicate abstracts behave as unary predicate symbols; new atomic formulas from predicate abstracts can be made ....
M. Fitting and R. Mendelsohn. First--Order Modal Logic. Kluwer, 1998.
A Unifying Completeness Theorem in Quantified Modal Logic - Corsi (2001) (Correct)
....deal with the basic systems of quanti ed modal logic (q.m.l. starting from the one presented by S.Kripke in his pioneer paper [6] 1963. The lack of . a common completeness proof that can cover constant domains, varying domains, and models meeting other conditions. has often been felt, see [2], p.132. In [3] p.273 or [4] we read Ideally, we would like to nd a completely general completeness proof. We intend to answer in a positive way to the worries concerning the proof theory of q.m.l. by showing that the system Q :K, Kripke s original one with the addition of individual ....
....is A. A w A is derivable in L from a set of formulas, L A, i for some nite number of formulas A 1 ; An in , L A 1 : An A. Lemma 3 Theorems of Q :K that we will use in the sequel (often without mentioning them) See [5] pp.277 280. We follow Fitting and Mendelsohn, [2], for the choice of this axiom system. To rule out empty domains add to Q :K the axiom 8xA A, where x is not free in A. i) 8y(A(y) 9xA(x= y) Existential Instantiation. ii) 8z 1 : 8zn8z[8xA(z 1 ; z n ; x) A(z 1 ; z n ; z=x) z may or may not occur in A(z 1 ; ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
Fitting, Melvin & Mendelsohn, Richard L., First-Order Modal Logic, Kluwer A P, 1998.
First-order Multi-Modal Deduction - Stone (Correct)
....Mark Steedman, Rich Thomason and L. Thorne McCarty for extensive comments. This work was supported by a postdoctoral fellowship from RUCCS. November 9, 1999. 2 1 Introduction Recent years have seen an explosion in research in formalizing inference in modal logic [Gore, 1999, Basin et al. 1998, Fitting and Mendelsohn, 1998] and in using modal theories in knowledge representation [Fagin et al. 1995, McCarthy and Buvac, 1994, Stone, 1998] Unfortunately, research on modal inference does not link up as directly as could be hoped with proposed modal theories. This report aims to help provide such links by providing a ....
....links by providing a set of extremely general results about first order multi modal deduction in terms of analytic tableaux and a prefix representation of possible worlds. We first provide sound and complete ground tableau and sequent inference systems, extending and refining those presented in [Fitting and Mendelsohn, 1998] to the multi modal case. Then we show how to apply general proof theoretic techniques to derive an equivalent calculus where Herbrand terms streamline proof search [Lincoln and Shankar, 1994] Finally, we derive a lifted multi modal sequent inference system, which uses unification (or ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
Fitting, M. and Mendelsohn, R. L. (1998). Firstorder Modal Logic, volume 277 of Synthese Library. Kluwer, Dordrecht.
Communicative Intentions and Conversational Processes in.. - Stone (2002) (Correct)
....describe the shared information (equivalently, the common knowledge or common ground) that interlocutors presuppose in conversation [Stalnaker, 1973, Clark and Marshall, 1981] C]p means that p is shared. I describe [C] like [N] as a modal operator, so that the inference in (6) is valid. See [Fitting and Mendelsohn, 1998]. 6) a [C]p b [C] p # q) c [C]q If we make unrestricted use of these inferences in assessing our real mental states, we find a problem of logical omniscience. We predict that we know all the consequences of what we know, all the theorems of mathematics for example. It is a rather poor ....
Fitting, M. and Mendelsohn, R. L. (1998). First-order Modal Logic, volume 277 of Synthese Library. Kluwer, Dordrecht.
Advances in Modal Logic, Volume 3 - Wolter, Wansing, de Rijke.. (2000) (Correct)
....Copyright c fl 2000, CSLI Publications. 2 Marcus Kracht and Oliver Kutz tics is also inadequate from a more philosophical point of view or that standard syntactic machinery is insufficient with respect to a proper treatment of e.g. singular terms or definite descriptions in modal contexts (cf. Fitting and Mendelsohn 1998) . One should also mention here different attempts to modify or generalize the Counterpart Theory by David Lewis. The main problem obviously lies in the question of how to treat modal individuals . Observe that in standard semantic approaches like constant or varying domain semantics, ....
....the exact connection between the different proposed semantics is to be spelled out. It should also be investigated how the semantics works with richer modal languages that use besides an existence predicate e.g. an actuality operator, universal modalities or lambda abstraction as discussed in (Fitting and Mendelsohn 1998). As a last point in case we would like to point to the problem of investigating the question, which (philosophical) notion of object or individual is presupposed by the kind of semantics we have discussed in this paper. We believe that modal predicate logic in itself does not fix the notion of an ....
Fitting, Melvin, and Richard L. Mendelsohn. 1998. First--Order Modal Logic. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.
Knowledge de re , Identity, And Games Of Imperfect Information - Pietarinen (2000) (Correct)
....its interpretation is xed across the set of possible worlds. Likewise, the skolemisation of K9xSx should yield to K Sf , f now within the scope of K. More explicitly, this means that K9f Sf , so the interpretation of f is in an obvious sense world relative. Similar observations are discussed in [Fitting, 1998], where a number of examples are adduced as ones conventional rst order modal logics are not content with. In fact, natural language is full of examples that deserve subtle mechanisms to adequately be captured in intensional formalisms, and they can be found even in extensional sentences such as ....
Fitting, M.: (1998) First-Order Modal Logic, Dordrecht: Kluwer.
First-Order Intensional Logic - Fitting (2003) (1 citation) Self-citation (Fitting) (Correct)
No context found.
M. C. Fitting and R. Mendelsohn. First-Order Modal Logic. Kluwer, 1998.
Higher-Order Modal Logic - A Sketch - Fitting Self-citation (Fitting) (Correct)
....this gives terms two kinds of values, what they denote, and what they mean. Of course this is loose. But the introduction of a scoping mechanism also turns out to be of considerable use here. This was done first in [7, 9] My colleague Richard Mendelsohn and I developed the idea quite fully in [3], and a highly condensed version is available in [2] But su#ce it to say that the notion of predicate abstraction supplies an essential missing ingredient for formal treatments of intentional logics, modal in particular, as well as for cases where terms can lack designations. Thinking further on ....
....ways of doing this. Each possible world in G can have its own domain, in which case we take D to be a domain function, mapping worlds to non empty sets. Or, all possible worlds can have the same domain, in which case we take D to be just a set, the common domain for all worlds. In [5] and [3] reasons are presented as to why either version can be taken as basic in the first order case essentially each can simulate the other. In the interests of simplicity we adopt the constant domain version in the higher order setting. Philosophically, this amounts to a possibilist approach to ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
M. C. Fitting and R. Mendelsohn. First-Order Modal Logic. Kluwer, 1998.
On Quantified Modal Logic - Fitting (1999) (1 citation) Self-citation (Fitting) (Correct)
....kinds of problems they cannot arise. Since these problems do not arise in classical logic, machinery for a solution is missing as well. Since the problems are significant, and the solution is trivial, the issues should be better known. My colleague Richard Mendelsohn and I have written a book, [6], presenting a coherent approach to first order modal logic that addresses the problems raised above. While our book is primarily aimed at philosophers, it contains much discussion of formal semantics and tableau based proof procedures. A very brief summary of the material from the book appeared ....
....formulas: 1. ##x.P (x)#(c) 2. ##x.P (x)#(c) What we now do is set out a formal modal semantics incorporating this idea, which we refer to as predicate abstraction. I have sketched these ideas before [1, 2] but these were essentially preliminary versions. The definitive treatment is in [6] and what follows is a partial sketch. I have already said what a modal frame was above, but the present notion of model is considerably broadened. First, in a modal frame #G, R,D#, recall that we place no restrictions on the domain function D it assigns to each world some non empty set, ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
M. C. Fitting and R. Mendelsohn. First-Order Modal Logic. Kluwer, 1998. Forthcoming.
First-Order Classical Modal Logic: Applications in logics.. - Arlo-Costa, Pacuit (Correct)
No context found.
M. Fitting, M. and Mendelsohn, R. First Order Modal Logic, Kluwer, Dordrecht, 1998.
Staged Computation with Names and Necessity - Nanevski, Pfenning (2005) (Correct)
No context found.
Fitting, Melvin, & Mendelsohn, Richard L. (1999). First-order modal logic. Kluwer.
An Order-Sorted Quantified Modal Logic for - Meta-Ontology Ken Kaneiwa (Correct)
No context found.
M. Fitting and R. L. Mendelsohn. First-Order Modal Logic. 1998.
Order-Sorted Quantified Modal Logic: Tableau Calculus and - Ontological Property.. (Correct)
No context found.
M. Fitting and R. L. Mendelsohn. First-Order Modal Logic. 1998.
Observational Models of Requirements Evolution - Felici (2004) (Correct)
No context found.
Fitting, M. and Mendelsohn, R. L. (1998). FirstOrder Modal Logic. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Counterpart Semantics - A Foundational Study on Quantified Modal.. - Corsi (2002) (Correct)
No context found.
Melvin Fitting and Richard L. Mendelsohn, First-order modal logic, Kluwer A P, 1998.
From Intervals to? Towards a General Description of.. - Kreinovich, Dimuro.. (2004) (Correct)
No context found.
M. Fitting and R. Mendelsohn, First Order Modal Logic, Kluwer, Dordrecht, 1998.
On BAN Logics for Industrial Security Protocols - Agray, van der Hoek, de Vink (2001) (2 citations) (Correct)
No context found.
M. Fitting and R. Mendelsohn, First order modal logic, Kluwer, 1998.
Degree Relatives Are Ordinary Relatives - Butler (2001) (Correct)
No context found.
Fitting, Melvin, and Richard L. Mendelsohn. 1999. `First-Order Modal Logic', Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.
Online articles have much greater impact More about CiteSeer.IST Add search form to your site Submit documents Feedback
CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC