Reasoning about update logic:
Abstract: "Logical frameworks for analysing the dynamics of information processing abound [4, 5, 8, 10, 12, 14, 20, 22]. Some of these frameworks focus on the dynamics of the interpretation process, some on the dynamics of the process of drawing inferences, and some do both of these. Formalisms...
Gespeichert in:
| Hauptverfasser: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Buch |
| Sprache: | English |
| Veröffentlicht: |
Amsterdam
1993
|
| Schriftenreihe: | Centrum voor Wiskunde en Informatica <Amsterdam> / Department of Computer Science: Report CS
93,12 |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Zusammenfassung: | Abstract: "Logical frameworks for analysing the dynamics of information processing abound [4, 5, 8, 10, 12, 14, 20, 22]. Some of these frameworks focus on the dynamics of the interpretation process, some on the dynamics of the process of drawing inferences, and some do both of these. Formalisms galore [sic], so it is felt that some conceptual streamlining would pay off. This paper is part of a larger scale enterprise to pursue the obvious parallel between information processing and imperative programming. We demonstrate that logical tools from theoretical computer science are relevant for the logic of information flow. More specifically, we show that the perspective of Hoare logic [13, 18] can fruitfully be applied to the conceptual simplification of information flow logics. Part one of this program consisted of the analysis of 'dynamic interpretation' in this way, using the example of dynamic predicate logic [10]; the results were published in [7] The present paper constitutes the second part of the program, the analysis of 'dynamic inference'. Here we focus on Veltman's update logic [22]. Update logic is an example of a logical framework which takes the dynamics of drawing inferences into account by modelling information growth as discarding of possibilities. This paper shows how information logics like update logic can fruitfully be studied by linking their dynamic principles to static 'correctness descriptions'. Our theme is exemplified by providing a sound and complete Hoare/Pratt style deduction system for update logic. The Hoare/Pratt correctness statements use modal propositional dynamic logic as an assertion language and connect update logic to the modal propositional logic S5. The connection with S5 provides a clear link between the dynamic and the static semantics of update logic. The fact that update logic is decidable was noted already in [2]; the connection with S5 provides an alternative proof The S5 connection can also be used for rephrasing the validity notions of update logic and for performing consistency checks. In conclusion, it is argued that interpreting the dynamic statements of information logics as dynamic modal operators has much wider applicability. In fact, the method can be used to axiomatize quite a wide range of information logics. |
| Beschreibung: | 18 S. |
Internformat
MARC
| LEADER | 00000nam a2200000 cb4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | BV009033856 | ||
| 003 | DE-604 | ||
| 005 | 00000000000000.0 | ||
| 007 | t | ||
| 008 | 940227s1993 |||| 00||| eng d | ||
| 035 | |a (OCoLC)636817465 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)BVBBV009033856 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-604 |b ger |e rakddb | ||
| 041 | 0 | |a eng | |
| 049 | |a DE-29T | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Eijck, Jan van |d 1951- |e Verfasser |0 (DE-588)112411223 |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Reasoning about update logic |c Jan van Eijck & Fer-Jan de Vries |
| 264 | 1 | |a Amsterdam |c 1993 | |
| 300 | |a 18 S. | ||
| 336 | |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |b n |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |b nc |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 490 | 1 | |a Centrum voor Wiskunde en Informatica <Amsterdam> / Department of Computer Science: Report CS |v 93,12 | |
| 520 | 3 | |a Abstract: "Logical frameworks for analysing the dynamics of information processing abound [4, 5, 8, 10, 12, 14, 20, 22]. Some of these frameworks focus on the dynamics of the interpretation process, some on the dynamics of the process of drawing inferences, and some do both of these. Formalisms galore [sic], so it is felt that some conceptual streamlining would pay off. This paper is part of a larger scale enterprise to pursue the obvious parallel between information processing and imperative programming. We demonstrate that logical tools from theoretical computer science are relevant for the logic of information flow. More specifically, we show that the perspective of Hoare logic [13, 18] can fruitfully be applied to the conceptual simplification of information flow logics. Part one of this program consisted of the analysis of 'dynamic interpretation' in this way, using the example of dynamic predicate logic [10]; the results were published in [7] | |
| 520 | 3 | |a The present paper constitutes the second part of the program, the analysis of 'dynamic inference'. Here we focus on Veltman's update logic [22]. Update logic is an example of a logical framework which takes the dynamics of drawing inferences into account by modelling information growth as discarding of possibilities. This paper shows how information logics like update logic can fruitfully be studied by linking their dynamic principles to static 'correctness descriptions'. Our theme is exemplified by providing a sound and complete Hoare/Pratt style deduction system for update logic. The Hoare/Pratt correctness statements use modal propositional dynamic logic as an assertion language and connect update logic to the modal propositional logic S5. The connection with S5 provides a clear link between the dynamic and the static semantics of update logic. The fact that update logic is decidable was noted already in [2]; the connection with S5 provides an alternative proof | |
| 520 | 3 | |a The S5 connection can also be used for rephrasing the validity notions of update logic and for performing consistency checks. In conclusion, it is argued that interpreting the dynamic statements of information logics as dynamic modal operators has much wider applicability. In fact, the method can be used to axiomatize quite a wide range of information logics. | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Knowledge representation (Information theory) | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Vries, Fer-Jan de |e Verfasser |4 aut | |
| 810 | 2 | |a Department of Computer Science: Report CS |t Centrum voor Wiskunde en Informatica <Amsterdam> |v 93,12 |w (DE-604)BV008928356 |9 93,12 | |
| 999 | |a oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-005976644 | ||
Datensatz im Suchindex
| _version_ | 1804123387341045760 |
|---|---|
| any_adam_object | |
| author | Eijck, Jan van 1951- Vries, Fer-Jan de |
| author_GND | (DE-588)112411223 |
| author_facet | Eijck, Jan van 1951- Vries, Fer-Jan de |
| author_role | aut aut |
| author_sort | Eijck, Jan van 1951- |
| author_variant | j v e jv jve f j d v fjd fjdv |
| building | Verbundindex |
| bvnumber | BV009033856 |
| ctrlnum | (OCoLC)636817465 (DE-599)BVBBV009033856 |
| format | Book |
| fullrecord | <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>03389nam a2200325 cb4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">BV009033856</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-604</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">00000000000000.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">t</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">940227s1993 |||| 00||| eng d</controlfield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(OCoLC)636817465</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)BVBBV009033856</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-604</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="e">rakddb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="049" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-29T</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Eijck, Jan van</subfield><subfield code="d">1951-</subfield><subfield code="e">Verfasser</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)112411223</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Reasoning about update logic</subfield><subfield code="c">Jan van Eijck & Fer-Jan de Vries</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Amsterdam</subfield><subfield code="c">1993</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">18 S.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="490" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Centrum voor Wiskunde en Informatica <Amsterdam> / Department of Computer Science: Report CS</subfield><subfield code="v">93,12</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1="3" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract: "Logical frameworks for analysing the dynamics of information processing abound [4, 5, 8, 10, 12, 14, 20, 22]. Some of these frameworks focus on the dynamics of the interpretation process, some on the dynamics of the process of drawing inferences, and some do both of these. Formalisms galore [sic], so it is felt that some conceptual streamlining would pay off. This paper is part of a larger scale enterprise to pursue the obvious parallel between information processing and imperative programming. We demonstrate that logical tools from theoretical computer science are relevant for the logic of information flow. More specifically, we show that the perspective of Hoare logic [13, 18] can fruitfully be applied to the conceptual simplification of information flow logics. Part one of this program consisted of the analysis of 'dynamic interpretation' in this way, using the example of dynamic predicate logic [10]; the results were published in [7]</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1="3" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">The present paper constitutes the second part of the program, the analysis of 'dynamic inference'. Here we focus on Veltman's update logic [22]. Update logic is an example of a logical framework which takes the dynamics of drawing inferences into account by modelling information growth as discarding of possibilities. This paper shows how information logics like update logic can fruitfully be studied by linking their dynamic principles to static 'correctness descriptions'. Our theme is exemplified by providing a sound and complete Hoare/Pratt style deduction system for update logic. The Hoare/Pratt correctness statements use modal propositional dynamic logic as an assertion language and connect update logic to the modal propositional logic S5. The connection with S5 provides a clear link between the dynamic and the static semantics of update logic. The fact that update logic is decidable was noted already in [2]; the connection with S5 provides an alternative proof</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1="3" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">The S5 connection can also be used for rephrasing the validity notions of update logic and for performing consistency checks. In conclusion, it is argued that interpreting the dynamic statements of information logics as dynamic modal operators has much wider applicability. In fact, the method can be used to axiomatize quite a wide range of information logics.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Knowledge representation (Information theory)</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Vries, Fer-Jan de</subfield><subfield code="e">Verfasser</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="810" ind1="2" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Department of Computer Science: Report CS</subfield><subfield code="t">Centrum voor Wiskunde en Informatica <Amsterdam></subfield><subfield code="v">93,12</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-604)BV008928356</subfield><subfield code="9">93,12</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="999" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-005976644</subfield></datafield></record></collection> |
| id | DE-604.BV009033856 |
| illustrated | Not Illustrated |
| indexdate | 2024-07-09T17:28:58Z |
| institution | BVB |
| language | English |
| oai_aleph_id | oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-005976644 |
| oclc_num | 636817465 |
| open_access_boolean | |
| owner | DE-29T |
| owner_facet | DE-29T |
| physical | 18 S. |
| publishDate | 1993 |
| publishDateSearch | 1993 |
| publishDateSort | 1993 |
| record_format | marc |
| series2 | Centrum voor Wiskunde en Informatica <Amsterdam> / Department of Computer Science: Report CS |
| spelling | Eijck, Jan van 1951- Verfasser (DE-588)112411223 aut Reasoning about update logic Jan van Eijck & Fer-Jan de Vries Amsterdam 1993 18 S. txt rdacontent n rdamedia nc rdacarrier Centrum voor Wiskunde en Informatica <Amsterdam> / Department of Computer Science: Report CS 93,12 Abstract: "Logical frameworks for analysing the dynamics of information processing abound [4, 5, 8, 10, 12, 14, 20, 22]. Some of these frameworks focus on the dynamics of the interpretation process, some on the dynamics of the process of drawing inferences, and some do both of these. Formalisms galore [sic], so it is felt that some conceptual streamlining would pay off. This paper is part of a larger scale enterprise to pursue the obvious parallel between information processing and imperative programming. We demonstrate that logical tools from theoretical computer science are relevant for the logic of information flow. More specifically, we show that the perspective of Hoare logic [13, 18] can fruitfully be applied to the conceptual simplification of information flow logics. Part one of this program consisted of the analysis of 'dynamic interpretation' in this way, using the example of dynamic predicate logic [10]; the results were published in [7] The present paper constitutes the second part of the program, the analysis of 'dynamic inference'. Here we focus on Veltman's update logic [22]. Update logic is an example of a logical framework which takes the dynamics of drawing inferences into account by modelling information growth as discarding of possibilities. This paper shows how information logics like update logic can fruitfully be studied by linking their dynamic principles to static 'correctness descriptions'. Our theme is exemplified by providing a sound and complete Hoare/Pratt style deduction system for update logic. The Hoare/Pratt correctness statements use modal propositional dynamic logic as an assertion language and connect update logic to the modal propositional logic S5. The connection with S5 provides a clear link between the dynamic and the static semantics of update logic. The fact that update logic is decidable was noted already in [2]; the connection with S5 provides an alternative proof The S5 connection can also be used for rephrasing the validity notions of update logic and for performing consistency checks. In conclusion, it is argued that interpreting the dynamic statements of information logics as dynamic modal operators has much wider applicability. In fact, the method can be used to axiomatize quite a wide range of information logics. Knowledge representation (Information theory) Vries, Fer-Jan de Verfasser aut Department of Computer Science: Report CS Centrum voor Wiskunde en Informatica <Amsterdam> 93,12 (DE-604)BV008928356 93,12 |
| spellingShingle | Eijck, Jan van 1951- Vries, Fer-Jan de Reasoning about update logic Knowledge representation (Information theory) |
| title | Reasoning about update logic |
| title_auth | Reasoning about update logic |
| title_exact_search | Reasoning about update logic |
| title_full | Reasoning about update logic Jan van Eijck & Fer-Jan de Vries |
| title_fullStr | Reasoning about update logic Jan van Eijck & Fer-Jan de Vries |
| title_full_unstemmed | Reasoning about update logic Jan van Eijck & Fer-Jan de Vries |
| title_short | Reasoning about update logic |
| title_sort | reasoning about update logic |
| topic | Knowledge representation (Information theory) |
| topic_facet | Knowledge representation (Information theory) |
| volume_link | (DE-604)BV008928356 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT eijckjanvan reasoningaboutupdatelogic AT vriesferjande reasoningaboutupdatelogic |