Search

This paper considers a specification rewriting meachanism for a specific fragment of Linear Temporal Logic for Finite traces, DECLAREd, working through an equational logic and rewriting mechanism under customary practitioner assumptions from the Business Process Management literature. By rewriting the specification into an equivalent formula which might be easier to compute, we aim to streamline current state-of-the-art temporal artificial intelligence algorithms working on temporal logic. As this specification rewriting mechanism is ultimately also able to determine with the provided specification is a tautology (always true formula) or a formula containing a temporal contradiction, by detecting the necessity of a specific activity label to be both present and absent within a log, this implies that the proved mechanism is ultimately a SAT-solver for DECLAREd. We prove for the first time, to the best of our knowledge, that this fragment is a polytime fragment of LTLf, while all the previously-investigated fragments or extensions of such a language were in polyspace. We test these considerations over formal synthesis (Lydia), SAT-Solvers (AALTAF) and formal verification (KnoBAB) algorithms, where formal verification can be also run on top of a relational database and can be therefore expressed in terms of relational query answering. We show that all these benefit from the aforementioned assumptions, as running their tasks over a rewritten equivalent specification will improve their running times, thus motivating the pressing need of this approach for practical temporal artificial intelligence scenarios. We validate such claims by testing such algorithms over a Cybersecurity dataset.

In this paper, we defined the concept \(\mathcal{SUP}\)-hesitant fuzzy interior ideals in \(\Gamma\)-semigroups, which is generalized of hesitant fuzzy interior ideals in \(\Gamma\)-semigroups. Additionally, we study fundamental properties of \(\mathcal{SUP}\)-hesitant fuzzy interior ideals in \(\Gamma\)-semigroups. Finally, we investigate characterized properties of those.

Linear Logic is a versatile framework with diverse applications in computer science and mathematics. One intriguing fragment of Linear Logic is Multiplicative-Additive Linear Logic (MALL), which forms the exponential-free component of the larger framework. Modifying MALL, researchers have explored weaker logics such as Noncommutative MALL (Bilinear Logic, BL) and Cyclic MALL (CyMALL) to investigate variations in commutativity. In this paper, we focus on Cyclic Nonassociative Bilinear Logic (CyNBL), a variant that combines noncommutativity and nonassociativity. We introduce a sequent system for CyNBL, which includes an auxiliary system for incorporating nonlogical axioms. Notably, we establish the cut elimination property for CyNBL. Moreover, we establish the strong conservativeness of CyNBL over Full Nonassociative Lambek Calculus (FNL) without additive constants. The paper highlights that all proofs are constructed using syntactic methods, ensuring their constructive nature. We provide insights into constructing cut-free proofs and establishing a logical relationship between CyNBL and FNL.

Abstract Truthmaking (2023), by Jamin Asay, is part of the “Elements in Metaphysics” series, published by the Cambridge University Press. The book is an excellent brief introduction to truthmaking theory: accessible, clear, and enjoyable, covering the most fundamental problems of the field. One of the highlights of the book is the chapter on truthmakers for truths concerning social constructions. It successfully shows that truthmaking theory is not only related to abstract metaphysical problems but is also tied to central puzzles in ethics and political philosophy (more specifically philosophies of race and gender).

Abstract In the literature, there are several claims about the centrality of a pro- cess ontology. It has often proved difficult, however, to understand what a process is supposed to be, and what the central difference to thing-based ontologies amounts to. It would be useful to see what an abstract account of this difference consists in. This paper provides a sketch of what logic we should use for a process-based ontology, and argues that intuitionistic logic, and smooth infinitesimal analysis, provide a useful basis for process ontology. A brief sketch of probability for processes is made.

We introduce a call-by-name lambda-calculus $\lambda Jn$ with generalized applications which is equipped with distant reduction. This allows to unblock $\beta$-redexes without resorting to the standard permutative conversions of generalized applications used in the original $\Lambda J$-calculus with generalized applications of Joachimski and Matthes. We show strong normalization of simply-typed terms, and we then fully characterize strong normalization by means of a quantitative (i.e. non-idempotent intersection) typing system. This characterization uses a non-trivial inductive definition of strong normalization --related to others in the literature--, which is based on a weak-head normalizing strategy. We also show that our calculus $\lambda Jn$ relates to explicit substitution calculi by means of a faithful translation, in the sense that it preserves strong normalization. Moreover, our calculus $\lambda Jn$ and the original $\Lambda J$-calculus determine equivalent notions of strong normalization. As a consequence, $\lambda J$ inherits a faithful translation into explicit substitutions, and its strong normalization can also be characterized by the quantitative typing system designed for $\lambda Jn$, despite the fact that quantitative subject reduction fails for permutative conversions.

We study first-order logic over unordered structures whose elements carry a finite number of data values from an infinite domain. Data values can be compared wrt.\ equality. As the satisfiability problem for this logic is undecidable in general, we introduce a family of local fragments. They restrict quantification to the neighbourhood of a given reference point that is bounded by some radius. Our first main result establishes decidability of the satisfiability problem for the local radius-1 fragment in presence of one "diagonal relation". On the other hand, extending the radius leads to undecidability. In a second part, we provide the precise decidability and complexity landscape of the satisfiability problem for the existential fragments of local logic, which are parameterized by the number of data values carried by each element and the radius of the considered neighbourhoods. Altogether, we draw a landscape of formalisms that are suitable for the specification of systems with data and open up new avenues for future research.

Event-clock automata (ECA) are a well-known semantic subclass of timed automata (TA) which enjoy admirable theoretical properties, e.g., determinizability, and are practically useful to capture timed specifications. However, unlike for timed automata, there exist no implementations for checking non-emptiness of event-clock automata. As ECAs contain special prophecy clocks that guess and maintain the time to the next occurrence of specific events, they cannot be seen as a syntactic subclass of TA. Therefore, implementations for TA cannot be directly used for ECAs, and moreover the translation of an ECA to a semantically equivalent TA is expensive. Another reason for the lack of ECA implementations is the difficulty in adapting zone-based algorithms, critical in the timed automata setting, to the event-clock automata setting. This difficulty was studied by Geeraerts et al. in 2011, where the authors proposed a zone enumeration procedure that uses zone extrapolations for finiteness. In this article, we propose a different zone-based algorithm to solve the reachability problem for event-clock automata, using simulations for finiteness. A surprising consequence of our result is that for event-predicting automata, the subclass of event-clock automata that only use prophecy clocks, we obtain finiteness even without any simulations. For general event-clock automata, our new algorithm exploits the G-simulation framework, which is the coarsest known simulation relation in timed automata literature, and has been recently used for advances in other extensions of timed automata.

We study many-valued coalgebraic logics with semi-primal algebras of truth-degrees. We provide a systematic way to lift endofunctors defined on the variety of Boolean algebras to endofunctors on the variety generated by a semi-primal algebra. We show that this can be extended to a technique to lift classical coalgebraic logics to many-valued ones, and that (one-step) completeness and expressivity are preserved under this lifting. For specific classes of endofunctors, we also describe how to obtain an axiomatization of the lifted many-valued logic directly from an axiomatization of the original classical one. In particular, we apply all of these techniques to classical modal logic.

We study operations on fixpoint equation systems (FES) over arbitrary complete lattices. We investigate under which conditions these operations, such as substituting variables by their definition, and swapping the ordering of equations, preserve the solution of a FES. We provide rigorous, computer-checked proofs. Along the way, we list a number of known and new identities and inequalities on extremal fixpoints in complete lattices.

We present fully abstract encodings of the call-by-name and call-by-value $\lambda$-calculus into HOcore, a minimal higher-order process calculus with no name restriction. We consider several equivalences on the $\lambda$-calculus side -- normal-form bisimilarity, applicative bisimilarity, and contextual equivalence -- that we internalize into abstract machines in order to prove full abstraction of the encodings. We also demonstrate that this technique scales to the $\lambda\mu$-calculus, i.e., a standard extension of the $\lambda$-calculus with control operators.

Derived datasets can be defined implicitly or explicitly. An implicit definition (of dataset O in terms of datasets I) is a logical specification involving two distinguished sets of relational symbols. One set of relations is for the "source data" I, and the other is for the "interface data" O. Such a specification is a valid definition of O in terms of I, if any two models of the specification agreeing on I agree on O. In contrast, an explicit definition is a transformation (or "query" below) that produces O from I. Variants of Beth's theorem state that one can convert implicit definitions to explicit ones. Further, this conversion can be done effectively given a proof witnessing implicit definability in a suitable proof system. We prove the analogous implicit-to-explicit result for nested relations: implicit definitions, given in the natural logic for nested relations, can be converted to explicit definitions in the nested relational calculus (NRC). We first provide a model-theoretic argument for this result, which makes some additional connections that may be of independent interest, between NRC queries, interpretations, a standard mechanism for defining structure-to-structure translation in logic, and between interpretations and implicit to definability "up to unique isomorphism". The latter connection uses a variation of a result of Gaifman concerning "relatively categorical" theories. We also provide a proof-theoretic result that provides an effective argument: from a proof witnessing implicit definability, we can efficiently produce an NRC definition. This will involve introducing the appropriate proof system for reasoning with nested sets, along with some auxiliary Beth-type results for this system. As a consequence, we can effectively extract rewritings of NRC queries in terms of NRC views, given a proof witnessing that the query is determined by the views.

The coalgebraic $\mu$-calculus provides a generic semantic framework for fixpoint logics over systems whose branching type goes beyond the standard relational setup, e.g. probabilistic, weighted, or game-based. Previous work on the coalgebraic $\mu$-calculus includes an exponential-time upper bound on satisfiability checking, which however relies on the availability of tableau rules for the next-step modalities that are sufficiently well-behaved in a formally defined sense; in particular, rule matches need to be representable by polynomial-sized codes, and the sequent duals of the rules need to absorb cut. While such rule sets have been identified for some important cases, they are not known to exist in all cases of interest, in particular ones involving either integer weights as in the graded $\mu$-calculus, or real-valued weights in combination with non-linear arithmetic. In the present work, we prove the same upper complexity bound under more general assumptions, specifically regarding the complexity of the (much simpler) satisfiability problem for the underlying one-step logic, roughly described as the nesting-free next-step fragment of the logic. The bound is realized by a generic global caching algorithm that supports on-the-fly satisfiability checking. Notably, our approach directly accommodates unguarded formulae, and thus avoids use of the guardedness transformation. Example applications include new exponential-time upper bounds for satisfiability checking in an extension of the graded $\mu$-calculus with polynomial inequalities (including positive Presburger arithmetic), as well as an extension of the (two-valued) probabilistic $\mu$-calculus with polynomial inequalities.

Inspired by a width invariant on permutations defined by Guillemot and Marx, Bonnet, Kim, Thomass\'e, and Watrigant introduced the twin-width of graphs, which is a parameter describing its structural complexity. This invariant has been further extended to binary structures, in several (basically equivalent) ways. We prove that a class of binary relational structures (that is: edge-colored partially directed graphs) has bounded twin-width if and only if it is a first-order transduction of a~proper permutation class. As a by-product, we show that every class with bounded twin-width contains at most $2^{O(n)}$ pairwise non-isomorphic $n$-vertex graphs.

Game comonads, introduced by Abramsky, Dawar and Wang and developed by Abramsky and Shah, give an interesting categorical semantics to some Spoiler-Duplicator games that are common in finite model theory. In particular they expose connections between one-sided and two-sided games, and parameters such as treewidth and treedepth and corresponding notions of decomposition. In the present paper, we expand the realm of game comonads to logics with generalised quantifiers. In particular, we introduce a comonad graded by two parameters $n \leq k$ such that isomorphisms in the resulting Kleisli category are exactly Duplicator winning strategies in Hella's $n$-bijection game with $k$ pebbles. We define a one-sided version of this game which allows us to provide a categorical semantics for a number of logics with generalised quantifiers. We also give a novel notion of tree decomposition that emerges from the construction.

A many-valued modal logic, called linear abelian modal logic \(\rm {\mathbf{LK(A)}}\) is introduced as an extension of the abelian modal logic \(\rm \mathbf{K(A)}\). Abelian modal logic \(\rm \mathbf{K(A)}\) is the minimal modal extension of the logic of lattice-ordered abelian groups. The logic \(\rm \mathbf{LK(A)}\) is axiomatized by extending \(\rm \mathbf{K(A)}\) with the modal axiom schemas \(\Box(\varphi\vee\psi)\rightarrow(\Box\varphi\vee\Box\psi)\) and \((\Box\varphi\wedge\Box\psi)\rightarrow\Box(\varphi\wedge\psi)\). Completeness theorem with respect to algebraic semantics and a hypersequent calculus admitting cut-elimination are established. Finally, the correspondence between hypersequent calculi and axiomatization is investigated.

Regions-based theories of space aim—among others—to define points in a geometrically appealing way. The most famous definition of this kind is probably due to Whitehead. However, to conclude that the objects defined are points indeed, one should show that they are points of a geometrical or a topological space constructed in a specific way. This paper intends to show how the development of mathematical tools allows showing that Whitehead’s method of extensive abstraction provides a construction of objects that are fundamental building blocks of specific topological spaces.

In this paper, considering L-algebras, which include a significant number of other algebraic structures, we present a definition of modules on L-algebras (L-modules). Then we provide some examples and obtain some results on L-modules. Also, we present definitions of prime ideals of L-algebras and L-submodules (prime L-submodules) of L-modules, and investigate the relationship between them. Finally, by proving a number of theorems, we provide some conditions for having prime L-submodules.

The main goal of this paper is to introduce the notion of stabilizers in \(L\)-algebras and develop stabilizer theory in \(L\)-algebras. In this paper, we introduced the notions of left and right stabilizers and investigated some related properties of them. Then, we discussed the relations among stabilizers, ideal and co-annihilators. Also, we obtained that the set of all ideals of a \(CKL\)-algebra forms a relative pseudo-complemented lattice. In addition, we proved that right stabilizers in \(CKL\)-algebra are ideals. Then by using the right stabilizers we produced a basis for a topology on \(L\)-algebra. We showed that the generated topology by this basis is Baire, connected, locally connected and separable and we investigated the other properties of this topology.

Jaśkowski's discussive (discursive) logic D2 is historically one of the first paraconsistent logics, i.e., logics which 'tolerate' contradictions. Following Jaśkowski's idea to define his discussive logic by means of the modal logic S5 via special translation functions between discussive and modal languages, and supporting at the same time the tradition of paracomplete logics being the counterpart of paraconsistent ones, we present a paracomplete discussive logic D2p.

We redefine a system of varieties definable by a schema of equations to include finite dimensions. Then we present a technique using ultraproducts enabling one to lift results proved for every finite dimension to the transfinite. Let \(\bf Ord\) denote the class of all ordinals. Let \(\langle \mathbf{K}_{\alpha}: \alpha\in \bf Ord\rangle\) be a system of varieties definable by a schema. Given any ordinal \(\alpha\), we define an operator \(\mathsf{Nr}_{\alpha}\) that acts on \(\mathbf{K}_{\beta}\) for any \(\beta>\alpha\) giving an algebra in \(\mathbf{K}_{\alpha}\), as an abstraction of taking \(\alpha\)-neat reducts for cylindric algebras. We show that for any positive \(k\), and any infinite ordinal \(\alpha\) that \(\mathbf{S}\mathsf{Nr}_{\alpha}\mathbf{K}_{\alpha+k+1}\) cannot be axiomatized by a finite schema over \(\mathbf{S}\mathsf{Nr}_{\alpha}\mathbf{K}_{\alpha+k}\) given that the result is valid for all finite dimensions greater than some fixed finite ordinal. We apply our results to cylindric algebras and Halmos quasipolyadic algebras with equality. As an application to our algebraic result we obtain a strong incompleteness theorem (in the sense that validitities are not captured by finitary Hilbert style axiomatizations) for an algebraizable extension of \(L_{\omega,\omega}\).

Decidability of monadic first-order classical logic was established by Löwenheim in 1915. The proof made use of a semantic argument and a purely syntactic proof has never been provided. In the present paper we introduce a syntactic proof of decidability of monadic first-order logic in innex normal form which exploits G3-style sequent calculi. In particular, we introduce a cut- and contraction-free calculus having a (complexity-optimal) terminating proof-search procedure. We also show that this logic can be faithfully embedded in the modal logic T.

In this paper, we prove measurability of event for which a general continuous-time stochastic process satisfies continuous-time Metric Temporal Logic (MTL) formula. Continuous-time MTL can define temporal constrains for physical system in natural way. Then there are several researches that deal with probability of continuous MTL semantics for stochastic processes. However, proving measurability for such events is by no means an obvious task, even though it is essential. The difficulty comes from the semantics of "until operator", which is defined by logical sum of uncountably many propositions. Given the difficulty involved in proving the measurability of such an event using classical measure-theoretic methods, we employ a theorem from stochastic analysis. This theorem is utilized to prove the measurability of hitting times for stochastic processes, and it stands as a profound result within the theory of capacity. Next, we provide an example that illustrates the failure of probability approximation when discretizing the continuous semantics of MTL formulas with respect to time. Additionally, we prove that the probability of the discretized semantics converges to that of the continuous semantics when we impose restrictions on diamond operators to prevent nesting.

We describe a general approach to deriving linear-time logics for a wide variety of state-based, quantitative systems, by modelling the latter as coalgebras whose type incorporates both branching and linear behaviour. Concretely, we define logics whose syntax is determined by the type of linear behaviour, and whose domain of truth values is determined by the type of branching behaviour, and we provide two semantics for them: a step-wise semantics akin to that of standard coalgebraic logics, and a path-based semantics akin to that of standard linear-time logics. The former semantics is useful for model checking, whereas the latter is the more natural semantics, as it measures the extent with which qualitative properties hold along computation paths from a given state. Our main result is the equivalence of the two semantics. We also provide a semantic characterisation of a notion of logical distance induced by these logics. Instances of our logics support reasoning about the possibility, likelihood or minimal cost of exhibiting a given linear-time property.

The Skolem problem is a long-standing open problem in linear dynamical systems: can a linear recurrence sequence (LRS) ever reach 0 from a given initial configuration? Similarly, the positivity problem asks whether the LRS stays positive from an initial configuration. Deciding Skolem (or positivity) has been open for half a century: the best known decidability results are for LRS with special properties (e.g., low order recurrences). But these problems are easier for "uninitialized" variants, where the initial configuration is not fixed but can vary arbitrarily: checking if there is an initial configuration from which the LRS stays positive can be decided in polynomial time (Tiwari in 2004, Braverman in 2006). In this paper, we consider problems that lie between the initialized and uninitialized variants. More precisely, we ask if 0 (resp. negative numbers) can be avoided from every initial configuration in a neighborhood of a given initial configuration. This can be considered as a robust variant of the Skolem (resp. positivity) problem. We show that these problems lie at the frontier of decidability: if the neighbourhood is given as part of the input, then robust Skolem and robust positivity are Diophantine hard, i.e., solving either would entail major breakthroughs in Diophantine approximations, as happens for (non-robust) positivity. However, if one asks whether such a neighbourhood exists, then the problems turn out to be decidable with PSPACE complexity. Our techniques also allow us to tackle robustness for ultimate positivity, which asks whether there is a bound on the number of steps after which the LRS remains positive. There are two variants depending on whether we ask for a "uniform" bound on this number of steps. For the non-uniform variant, when the neighbourhood is open, the problem turns out to be tractable, even when the neighbourhood is given as input.

Presheaf models of dependent type theory have been successfully applied to model HoTT, parametricity, and directed, guarded and nominal type theory. There has been considerable interest in internalizing aspects of these presheaf models, either to make the resulting language more expressive, or in order to carry out further reasoning internally, allowing greater abstraction and sometimes automated verification. While the constructions of presheaf models largely follow a common pattern, approaches towards internalization do not. Throughout the literature, various internal presheaf operators ($\surd$, $\Phi/\mathsf{extent}$, $\Psi/\mathsf{Gel}$, $\mathsf{Glue}$, $\mathsf{Weld}$, $\mathsf{mill}$, the strictness axiom and locally fresh names) can be found and little is known about their relative expressivenes. Moreover, some of these require that variables whose type is a shape (representable presheaf, e.g. an interval) be used affinely. We propose a novel type former, the transpension type, which is right adjoint to universal quantification over a shape. Its structure resembles a dependent version of the suspension type in HoTT. We give general typing rules and a presheaf semantics in terms of base category functors dubbed multipliers. Structural rules for shape variables and certain aspects of the transpension type depend on characteristics of the multiplier. We demonstrate how the transpension type and the strictness axiom can be combined to implement all and improve some of the aforementioned internalization operators (without formal claim in the case of locally fresh names).

In the context of the stream calculus, we present an Implicit Function Theorem (IFT) for polynomial systems, and discuss its relations with the classical IFT from calculus. In particular, we demonstrate the advantages of the stream IFT from a computational point of view, and provide a few example applications where its use turns out to be valuable.

$\text{TT}^{\Box}_{{\mathcal C}}$ is a generic family of effectful, extensional type theories with a forcing interpretation parameterized by modalities. This paper identifies a subclass of $\text{TT}^{\Box}_{{\mathcal C}}$ theories that internally realizes continuity principles through stateful computations, such as reference cells. The principle of continuity is a seminal property that holds for a number of intuitionistic theories such as System T. Roughly speaking, it states that functions on real numbers only need approximations of these numbers to compute. Generally, continuity principles have been justified using semantical arguments, but it is known that the modulus of continuity of functions can be computed using effectful computations such as exceptions or reference cells. In this paper, the modulus of continuity of the functionals on the Baire space is directly computed using the stateful computations enabled internally in the theory.

We propose a simple imperative programming language, ERC, that features arbitrary real numbers as primitive data type, exactly. Equipped with a denotational semantics, ERC provides a formal programming language-theoretic foundation to the algorithmic processing of real numbers. In order to capture multi-valuedness, which is well-known to be essential to real number computation, we use a Plotkin powerdomain and make our programming language semantics computable and complete: all and only real functions computable in computable analysis can be realized in ERC. The base programming language supports real arithmetic as well as implicit limits; expansions support additional primitive operations (such as a user-defined exponential function). By restricting integers to Presburger arithmetic and real coercion to the `precision' embedding $\mathbb{Z}\ni p\mapsto 2^p\in\mathbb{R}$, we arrive at a first-order theory which we prove to be decidable and model-complete. Based on said logic as specification language for preconditions and postconditions, we extend Hoare logic to a sound (w.r.t. the denotational semantics) and expressive system for deriving correct total correctness specifications. Various examples demonstrate the practicality and convenience of our language and the extended Hoare logic.

In this paper, we examine the relationship between the stability of the dynamical system $x^{\prime}=f(x)$ and the computability of its basins of attraction. We present a computable $C^{\infty}$ system $x^{\prime}=f(x)$ that possesses a computable and stable equilibrium point, yet whose basin of attraction is robustly non-computable in a neighborhood of $f$ in the sense that both the equilibrium point and the non-computability of its associated basin of attraction persist when $f$ is slightly perturbed. This indicates that local stability near a stable equilibrium point alone is insufficient to guarantee the computability of its basin of attraction. However, we also demonstrate that the basins of attraction associated with a structurally stable - globally stable (robust) - planar system defined on a compact set are computable. Our findings suggest that the global stability of a system and the compactness of the domain play a pivotal role in determining the computability of its basins of attraction.

We propose a relaxation to the definition of well-structured transition systems (\WSTS) while retaining the decidability of boundedness and non-termination. In this class, the well-quasi-ordered (wqo) condition is relaxed such that it is applicable only between states that are reachable one from another. Furthermore, the monotony condition is relaxed in the same way. While this retains the decidability of non-termination and boundedness, it appears that the coverability problem is undecidable. To this end, we define a new notion of monotony, called cover-monotony, which is strictly more general than the usual monotony and still allows us to decide a restricted form of the coverability problem.

Abstract: Metaphors are emotionally engaging, influenc-ing the evaluation of arguments. The paper empirically in-vestigates whether metaphors in the premise can lead the evaluator to judge an ad hominem argument as sound when the arguer instead committed a fallacy. The results show that ad hominem arguments with conventional and positive metaphors are more persuasive compared to those with novel and negative metaphors. Arguments with conventional metaphors are also perceived as more am-biguous, but less convincing, and emotionally appealing. Additionally, participants believe in the conclusion more when the premise contains a positive rather than a nega-tive metaphor, which instead helps the evaluator detect the fallacy. Résumé: Les métaphores sont émotionnellement engag-eantes et ainsi influencent l’évaluation des arguments. L'article étudie empiriquement si les métaphores em-ployées dans la prémisse peuvent amener l'évaluateur à juger un argument ad hominem comme solide bien que ce sophisme soit commis. Les résultats montrent que les ar-guments ad hominem utilisant des métaphores conven-tionnelles et positives sont plus convaincants que ceux utilisant des métaphores nouvelles et négatives. Les argu-ments utilisant des métaphores conventionnelles sont également perçus comme plus ambigus, mais moins con-vaincants et émotionnellement attrayants. De plus, les participants croient davantage à la conclusion lorsque la prémisse contient une métaphore positive plutôt que néga-tive, ce qui aide plutôt l'évaluateur à détecter le sophisme.

Abstract: This paper aims to develop the criteria for assessing semantic arguments. However, while this notion constituted the core of ancient dialectics and is addressed in several approaches to argument analysis, the criteria for evaluating such arguments are insufficient. This paper intends to address this problem by combining the insights of classical and contemporary logic and testing them against some controversies involving controversial definitions or classifications. Through detailed case studies of the argumentative uses involving the (re)definitions of racism, war, peace, and feminism, we formulated and tested eight evaluation criteria that may be expressed as critical questions. Résumé: Cet article vise à développer les critères d’évaluation des arguments sémantiques. Cependant, bien que cette notion constitue le coeur de la dialectique ancienne et soit abordée dans plusieurs approches de l’analyse des arguments, les critères d’évaluation de ces arguments sont insuffisants. Cet article vise à résoudre ce problème en combinant les idées de la logique classique et contemporaine et en les testant par rapport à certaines controverses impliquant des définitions ou des classifications controversées. À travers des études de cas détaillées sur les usages argumentatifs impliquant les (re)définitions du racisme, de la guerre, de la paix et du féminisme, nous avons formulé et mis à l’épreuve huit critères d'évaluation qui peuvent être exprimés sous forme de questions critiques.

The paper discusses the role of systemic means of persuasion in argument evaluation. The core class of systemic means of persuasion is regress stoppers, whose fundamental function is to halt the infinite regress of justification by making claims, premises, or overall position expressed in a persuasive message more acceptable to a recipient. The paper explores how systemic means of persuasion contribute to the structure of arguments in the Toulmin model and serve as cues for heuristic processing of persuasive messages. It also presents the results of the stylometric analysis and statistical data on the usage of systemic means of persuasion in three corpora which suggest that systemic means of persuasion constitute strategies independent of the strategy based on explicit argumentation marked by inference indicators.

Abstract: In this essay, I make a plea for a wide-ranging, open perspective on the evaluation of arguments. This involves a more flexible understanding of what fallacies are and for what argu-ments may be used. I acknowledge the great wealth of argumentation theory, but bemoan the lack of systematic, re-peatable, and explainable evaluation procedures. I then go on to introduce the works which contribute to this spe-cial issue and explain how they assist in the fulfilment of my hopes. Résumé: Dans cet essai, je plaide en faveur d’une perspective large et ou-verte sur l’évaluation des arguments. Cela implique une compréhension plus flexible de ce que sont les sophismes et des arguments qui peuvent être utilisés. Je reconnais la grande richesse de la théorie de l’argumentation, mais je dé-plore le manque de procédures d’éval-uation systématiques, reproductibles et explicables. Je présente ensuite les travaux qui contribuent à ce numéro spécial et explique comment ils con-tribuent à la réalisation de mes espoirs.

Abstract: This paper addresses the prob-lem of how to identify and evaluate argu-ments made in a nonverbal form. Such arguments may employ images, sounds, or a combination of these in a truly mul-timodal presentation. Here, we concen-trate on those which are classified as au-ditory, i.e. contain at least one premise or the conclusion in sound form. We pro-pose and test a solution whereby some el-ements of the Comprehensive Assess-ment Procedure for Natural Argumenta-tion (CAPNA) are modified to allow for the evaluation of auditory arguments. The results of this approach are illus-trated with the help of a number of au-thentic examples. Résumé: Cet article aborde le problème de la façon d'identifier et d'évaluer les ar-guments présentés sous une forme non verbale. De tels arguments peuvent uti-liser des images, des sons ou une com-binaison de ceux-ci dans une présenta-tion véritablement multimodale. Ici, nous nous concentrons sur les arguments classés comme auditifs, c'est-à-dire qui contiennent au moins une prémisse ou la conclusion sous forme sonore. Nous pro-posons et testons une solution dans laquelle certains éléments de la procédure d'évaluation globale de l'argu-mentation naturelle (CAPNA) sont mod-ifiés pour permettre l'évaluation des ar-guments auditifs. Les résultats de cette approche sont illustrés à l’aide de nom-breux exemples authentiques.

Abstract: In this paper, we contend that there are two ways of arguing, namely sincere and insincere arguing. We draw such a distinction, based on the felicity conditions of the complex speech act of arguing as modelled in van Eemeren and Grootendorst’s pragma-dialectical approach. We introduce a conversa-tional setting, which contains a speech act of arguing that does not count as in-sincere arguing, while being a sui gene-ris form of sincere arguing. We desig-nate it as “cooperative inquiry”. Finally, we show that argument evaluation plays a key role in determining whether an in-stance of arguing counts as either argu-ing sincerely or insincerely. Résumé: Dans cet article, nous affir-mons qu’il existe deux manières d’argu-menter, à savoir l’argumentation sincère et l’argumentation non sincère. Nous établissons une telle distinction, basée sur les conditions de félicité de l’acte de parole complexe consistant à argu-menter, tel que modélisé dans l’ap-proche pragma-dialectique de van Eemeren et Grootendorst. Nous intro-duisons un cadre conversationnel, qui contient un acte de parole d'argumenta-tion qui n'est pas considéré comme une argumentation non sincère, tout en étant une forme sui generis d'argumentation sincère. Nous la désignons comme « enquête coopérative ». Enfin, nous montrons que l’évaluation des argu-ments joue un rôle clé pour déterminer si un cas d’argumentation compte comme une argumentation sincère ou non.

Anthony Blair, who died in March of this year, may yet be remembered as the scholar who was instrumental in creating, developing and popularizing informal logic in the 1970s, and who then spent the rest of his career trying to decide what exactly it was he had discovered.

Abstract A critical review of Gonzalo Rodriguez-Pereyra’s Two Arguments for the Identity of Indiscernibles.

In the literature on Kleene algebra, a number of variants have been proposed which impose additional structure specified by a theory, such as Kleene algebra with tests (KAT) and the recent Kleene algebra with observations (KAO), or make specific assumptions about certain constants, as for instance in NetKAT. Many of these variants fit within the unifying perspective offered by Kleene algebra with hypotheses, which comes with a canonical language model constructed from a given set of hypotheses. For the case of KAT, this model corresponds to the familiar interpretation of expressions as languages of guarded strings. A relevant question therefore is whether Kleene algebra together with a given set of hypotheses is complete with respect to its canonical language model. In this paper, we revisit, combine and extend existing results on this question to obtain tools for proving completeness in a modular way. We showcase these tools by giving new and modular proofs of completeness for KAT, KAO and NetKAT, and we prove completeness for new variants of KAT: KAT extended with a constant for the full relation, KAT extended with a converse operation, and a version of KAT where the collection of tests only forms a distributive lattice.

We investigate the impact of non-regular path expressions on the decidability of satisfiability checking and querying in description logics extending ALC. Our primary objects of interest are ALCreg and ALCvpl, the extensions of with path expressions employing, respectively, regular and visibly-pushdown languages. The first one, ALCreg, is a notational variant of the well-known Propositional Dynamic Logic of Fischer and Ladner. The second one, ALCvpl, was introduced and investigated by Loding and Serre in 2007. The logic ALCvpl generalises many known decidable non-regular extensions of ALCreg. We provide a series of undecidability results. First, we show that decidability of the concept satisfiability problem for ALCvpl is lost upon adding the seemingly innocent Self operator. Second, we establish undecidability for the concept satisfiability problem for ALCvpl extended with nominals. Interestingly, our undecidability proof relies only on one single non-regular (visibly-pushdown) language, namely on r#s# := { r^n s^n | n in N } for fixed role names r and s. Finally, in contrast to the classical database setting, we establish undecidability of query entailment for queries involving non-regular atoms from r#s#, already in the case of ALC-TBoxes.

The pebbling comonad, introduced by Abramsky, Dawar and Wang, provides a categorical interpretation for the k-pebble games from finite model theory. The coKleisli category of the pebbling comonad specifies equivalences under different fragments and extensions of infinitary k-variable logic. Moreover, the coalgebras over this pebbling comonad characterise treewidth and correspond to tree decompositions. In this paper we introduce the pebble-relation comonad, which characterises pathwidth and whose coalgebras correspond to path decompositions. We further show that the existence of a coKleisli morphism in this comonad is equivalent to truth preservation in the restricted conjunction fragment of k-variable infinitary logic. We do this using Dalmau's pebble-relation game and an equivalent all-in-one pebble game. We then provide a similar treatment to the corresponding coKleisli isomorphisms via a bijective version of the all-in-one pebble game. Finally, we show as a consequence a new Lov\'asz-type theorem relating pathwidth to the restricted conjunction fragment of k-variable infinitary logic with counting quantifiers.

The ZX-calculus is a powerful framework for reasoning in quantum computing. It provides in particular a compact representation of matrices of interests. A peculiar property of the ZX-calculus is the absence of a formal sum allowing the linear combinations of arbitrary ZX-diagrams. The universality of the formalism guarantees however that for any two ZX-diagrams, the sum of their interpretations can be represented by a ZX-diagram. We introduce a general, inductive definition of the addition of ZX-diagrams, relying on the construction of controlled diagrams. Based on this addition technique, we provide an inductive differentiation of ZX-diagrams. Indeed, given a ZX-diagram with variables in the description of its angles, one can differentiate the diagram according to one of these variables. Differentiation is ubiquitous in quantum mechanics and quantum computing (e.g. for solving optimization problems). Technically, differentiation of ZX-diagrams is strongly related to summation as witnessed by the product rules. We also introduce an alternative, non inductive, differentiation technique rather based on the isolation of the variables. Finally, we apply our results to deduce a diagram for an Ising Hamiltonian.

The logic of information flows (LIF) has recently been proposed as a general framework in the field of knowledge representation. In this framework, tasks of procedural nature can still be modeled in a declarative, logic-based fashion. In this paper, we focus on the task of query processing under limited access patterns, a well-studied problem in the database literature. We show that LIF is well-suited for modeling this task. Toward this goal, we introduce a variant of LIF called "forward" LIF (FLIF), in a first-order setting. FLIF takes a novel graph-navigational approach; it is an XPath-like language that nevertheless turns out to be equivalent to the "executable" fragment of first-order logic defined by Nash and Lud\"ascher. One can also classify the variables in FLIF expressions as inputs and outputs. Expressions where inputs and outputs are disjoint, referred to as io-disjoint FLIF expressions, allow a particularly transparent translation into algebraic query plans that respect the access limitations. Finally, we show that general FLIF expressions can always be put into io-disjoint form.

We study the extent to which it is possible to approximate the optimal value of a Unique Games instance in Fixed-Point Logic with Counting (FPC). Formally, we prove lower bounds against the accuracy of FPC-interpretations that map Unique Games instances (encoded as relational structures) to rational numbers giving the approximate fraction of constraints that can be satisfied. We prove two new FPC-inexpressibility results for Unique Games: the existence of a $(1/2, 1/3 + \delta)$-inapproximability gap, and inapproximability to within any constant factor. Previous recent work has established similar FPC-inapproximability results for a small handful of other problems. Our construction builds upon some of these ideas, but contains a novel technique. While most FPC-inexpressibility results are based on variants of the CFI-construction, ours is significantly different. We start with a graph of very large girth and label the edges with random affine vector spaces over $\mathbb{F}_2$ that determine the constraints in the two structures. Duplicator's strategy involves maintaining a partial isomorphism over a minimal tree that spans the pebbled vertices of the graph.

The author has recently introduced an abstract algebraic framework of analogical proportions within the general setting of universal algebra. This paper studies analogical proportions in the boolean domain consisting of two elements 0 and 1 within his framework. It turns out that our notion of boolean proportions coincides with two prominent models from the literature in different settings. This means that we can capture two separate modellings of boolean proportions within a single framework which is mathematically appealing and provides further evidence for the robustness and applicability of the general framework.

Logical relations built on top of an operational semantics are one of the most successful proof methods in programming language semantics. In recent years, more and more expressive notions of operationally-based logical relations have been designed and applied to specific families of languages. However, a unifying abstract framework for operationally-based logical relations is still missing. We show how fibrations can provide a uniform treatment of operational logical relations, using as reference example a lambda-calculus with generic effects endowed with a novel, abstract operational semantics defined on a large class of categories. Moreover, this abstract perspective allows us to give a solid mathematical ground also to differential logical relations -- a recently introduced notion of higher-order distance between programs -- both pure and effectful, bringing them back to a common picture with traditional ones.

When translating a term calculus into a graphical formalism many inessential details are abstracted away. In the case of $\lambda$-calculus translated to proof-nets, these inessential details are captured by a notion of equivalence on $\lambda$-terms known as $\simeq_\sigma$-equivalence, in both the intuitionistic (due to Regnier) and classical (due to Laurent) cases. The purpose of this paper is to uncover a strong bisimulation behind $\simeq_\sigma$-equivalence, as formulated by Laurent for Parigot's $\lambda\mu$-calculus. This is achieved by introducing a relation $\simeq$, defined over a revised presentation of $\lambda\mu$-calculus we dub $\Lambda M$. More precisely, we first identify the reasons behind Laurent's $\simeq_\sigma$-equivalence on $\lambda\mu$-terms failing to be a strong bisimulation. Inspired by Laurent's \emph{Polarized Proof-Nets}, this leads us to distinguish multiplicative and exponential reduction steps on terms. Second, we enrich the syntax of $\lambda\mu$ to allow us to track the exponential operations. These technical ingredients pave the way towards a strong bisimulation for the classical case. We introduce a calculus $\Lambda M$ and a relation $\simeq$ that we show to be a strong bisimulation with respect to reduction in $\Lambda M$, ie. two $\simeq$-equivalent terms have the exact same reduction semantics, a result which fails for Regnier's $\simeq_\sigma$-equivalence in $\lambda$-calculus as well as for Laurent's $\simeq_\sigma$-equivalence in $\lambda\mu$. Although $\simeq$ is formulated over an enriched syntax and hence is not strictly included in Laurent's $\simeq_\sigma$, we show how it can be seen as a restriction of it.