We shall be concerned with the modal logic BK—which is based on the Belnap–Dunn four-valued matrix, and can be viewed as being obtained from the least normal modal logic K by adding ‘strong negation’. Though all four values ‘truth’, ‘falsity’, ‘neither’ and ‘both’ are employed in its Kripke semantics, only the first two are expressible as terms. We show that expanding the original language of BK to include constants for ‘neither’ or/and ‘both’ leads to quite unexpected results. To be more (...) precise, adding one of these constants has the effect of eliminating the respective value at the level of BK-extensions. In particular, if one adds both of these, then the corresponding lattice of extensions turns out to be isomorphic to that of ordinary normal modal logics. (shrink)

Let K be the least normal modal logic and BK its Belnapian version, which enriches K with ‘strong negation’. We carry out a systematic study of the lattice of logics containing BK based on: • introducing the classes of so-called explosive, complete and classical Belnapian modal logics; • assigning to every normal modal logic three special conservative extensions in these classes; • associating with every Belnapian modal logic its explosive, complete and classical counterparts. We investigate the relationships between special extensions (...) and counterparts, provide certain handy characterisations and suggest a useful decomposition of the lattice of logics containing BK. (shrink)

The paper contains a survey on the complexity of various truth hierarchies arising in Kripke’s theory. I present some new arguments, and use them to obtain a number of interesting generalisations of known results. These arguments are both relatively simple, involving only the basic machinery of constructive ordinals, and very general.

The present paper is devoted to computational aspects of propositional inconsistency-adaptive logics. In particular, we prove (relativized versions of) some principal results on computational complexity of derivability in such logics, namely in cases of CLuN r and CLuN m , i.e., CLuN supplied with the reliability strategy and the minimal abnormality strategy, respectively.

Inspired by Kit Fine’s theory of arbitrary objects, we explore some ways in which the generic structure of the natural numbers can be presented. Following a suggestion of Saul Kripke’s, we discuss how basic facts and questions about this generic structure can be expressed in the framework of Carnapian quantified modal logic.

In a rather general setting, we prove a number of basic theorems concerning computational complexity of derivability in adaptive logics. For that setting, the so-called standard format of adaptive logics is suitably adopted, and the corresponding completeness results are established in a very uniform way.

We carry out a study of definability issues in the standard models of Presburger and Skolem arithmetics (henceforth referred to simply as Presburger and Skolem arithmetics, for short, because we only deal with these models, not the theories, thus there is no risk of confusion) supplied with free unary predicates—which are strongly related to definability in the monadic SOA (second-order arithmetic) without × or + , respectively. As a consequence, we obtain a very direct proof for ${\Pi^1_1}$ -completeness of Presburger, (...) and also Skolem, arithmetic with a free unary predicate, generalize it to all ${\Pi^1_n}$ -levels, and give an alternative description of the analytical hierarchy without × or + . Here ‘direct’ means that one explicitly m-reduces the truth of ${\Pi^1_1}$ -formulae in SOA to the truth in the extended structures. Notice that for the case of Presburger arithmetic, the ${\Pi^1_1}$ -completeness was already known, but the proof was indirect and exploited some special ${\Pi^1_1}$ -completeness results on so-called recurrent nondeterministic Turing machines—for these reasons, it was hardly able to shed any light on definability issues or possible generalizations. (shrink)

Inspired by Hintikka’s ideas on constructivism, we are going to ‘effectivize’ the game-theoretic semantics for independence-friendly first-order logic, but in a somewhat different way than he did in the monograph ‘The Principles of Mathematics Revisited’. First we show that Nelson’s realizability interpretation—which extends the famous Kleene’s realizability interpretation by adding ‘strong negation’—restricted to the implication-free first-order formulas can be viewed as an effective version of GTS for FOL. Then we propose a realizability interpretation for IF-FOL, inspired by the so-called ‘trump (...) semantics’ which was discovered by Hodges, and show that this trump realizability interpretation can be viewed as an effective version of GTS for IF-FOL. Finally we prove that the trump realizability interpretation for IF-FOL appropriately generalises Nelson’s restricted realizability interpretation for the implication-free first-order formulas. (shrink)

Infinitary action logic can be naturally expanded by adding exponential and subexponential modalities from linear logic. In this article we shall develop infinitary action logic with a subexponential that allows multiplexing (instead of contraction). Both non-commutative and commutative versions of this logic will be considered, presented as infinitary sequent calculi. We shall prove cut admissibility for these calculi, and estimate the complexity of the corresponding derivability problems: in both cases it will turn out to be between complete first-order arithmetic and (...) the \(\omega ^\omega \) level of the hyperarithmetical hierarchy. Here the complexity upper bound is much lower than that for the system with a subexponential that allows contraction. The complexity lower bound in turn is much higher than that for infinitary action logic. (shrink)