In this paper we introduce a game semantics for System P, one of the most studied axiomatic systems for non-monotonic reasoning, conditional logic and belief revision. We prove soundness and completeness of the game semantics with respect to the rules of System P, and show that an inference is valid with respect to the game semantics if and only if it is valid with respect to the standard order semantics of System P. Combining these two results leads to a new completeness proof for System P with respect to its order semantics. Our approach allows us to construct for every inference either a concrete proof of the inference from the rules in System P or a countermodel in the order semantics. Our results rely on the notion of a witnessing set for an inference, whose existence is a concise, necessary and sufficient condition for validity of an inferences in System P. We also introduce an infinitary variant of System P and use the game semantics to show its completeness for the restricted class of well-founded orders.
KeywordsNon-monotonic consequence relations Conditional logic Belief revision Game semantics Dialogical logic
- 4.Friedman N., and J. Y. Halpern, On the complexity of conditional logics, in Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference (KR’94), Morgan Kaufmann, Burlington, 1994, pp. 202–213.Google Scholar
- 6.Hintikka, J., and G. Sandu, Game-theoretical semantics, in J. van Benthem and A. ter Meulen (ed.), Handbook of Logic and Language, 2nd edn. Elsevier, New York, 2010, pp. 415–465.Google Scholar
- 10.Lewis D.: Counterfactuals. Blackwell Publishers, Oxford (1973)Google Scholar
- 11.Lorenzen, P., and K. Lorenz, Dialogische Logik, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt, 1978.Google Scholar
- 12.Pozzato, G. L., Conditional and Preferential Logics: Proof Methods and Theorem Proving. Vol. 208. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications. IOS Press, Amsterdam, 2010.Google Scholar
- 13.Rahman, S., and T. Tulenheimo, From games to dialogues and back, in O. Majer, A.-V. Pietarinen, and T. Tulenheimo (ed.), Games: Unifying Logic, Language, and Philosophy, Springer, New York, 2009, pp. 153–208.Google Scholar
- 14.Väänänen, J., Models and Games, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2011.Google Scholar
- 15.Veltman, F., Logics for conditionals, PhD thesis, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, 1985.Google Scholar
Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.