Introduction to Modal Logic
author: Rajeev P. Goré,
Australian National University
published: April 1, 2009, recorded: January 2009, views: 51125
published: April 1, 2009, recorded: January 2009, views: 51125
Slides
Related content
Report a problem or upload files
If you have found a problem with this lecture or would like to send us extra material, articles, exercises, etc., please use our ticket system to describe your request and upload the data.Enter your e-mail into the 'Cc' field, and we will keep you updated with your request's status.
Watch videos: (click on thumbnail to launch)
Description
We cover the syntax, Kripke semantics, correspondence theory and tableaux-style proof theory of propositional modal and temporal logics. These logics have important applications in a diverse range of fields incuding Artificial Intelligence, Theoretical Computer Science and Hybrid Systems.
Link this page
Would you like to put a link to this lecture on your homepage?Go ahead! Copy the HTML snippet !
Reviews and comments:
can you please show also lesson "5" of Rajeev Goré cours about modal logic?
Why is it not there?
That makes very diffcoult to follow part 6 too...
Thank you,
Giuseppe Motta
Just amazing. One of the best introductions to Modal Logic. I will all his class lectures were recorded and published online.
- Balaji
How can (box phi) and (box not-phi) be true in the same world that doesn't have an immediate R-successor? Can anyone explain? I'm confused about this point.
Aglaopgamus@
It owes to the fact that to make box-phi true, you must satify not-diamond-not-phi. But to do that, diamond-not-phi must be false. This means that diamond-not-phi must be false, i.e. that it ain't true.
Consider what makes it true: that some world accessible to the targeted world makes -phi true, i.e. that phi is false at some world relative to it. Since there are no such world, the sentence diamond not-phi is not possible, hence not-diamond-not-phi, hence box-phi.
The same goes for box-not-phi.
You can't make any possibility assertions true, though, as far as I can tell without thinking... don't know if I got it all wrong, though.
Write your own review or comment: