The Logic of Uncertain Justifications

  • Bob Milnikel
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7734)

Abstract

In Artemov’s Justification Logic, one can make statements interpreted as “t is evidence for the truth of formula F.” We propose a variant of this logic in which one can say “I have degree r of confidence that t is evidence for the truth of formula F.” After defining both an axiomatic approach and a semantics for this Logic of Uncertain Justifications, we will prove the usual soundness and completeness theorems.

Keywords

Justification Logic Epistemic Logic Proof Theory 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Artëmov, S.N.: Logic of proofs. Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 67(1-3), 29–59 (1994)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Artemov, S.N.: Explicit provability and constructive semantics. Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 7(1), 1–36 (2001)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Artemov, S.N.: Justified common knowledge. Theoretical Computer Science 357(1-3), 4–22 (2006)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Artemov, S.N.: The logic of justification. The Review of Symbolic Logic 1(4), 477–513 (2008)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Artemov, S.N.: Why do we need Justification Logic? In: van Benthem, J., Gupta, A., Pacuit, E. (eds.) Games, Norms and Reasons: Logic at the Crossroads. Synthese Library, vol. 353, ch. 2, pp. 23–38. Springer (2011)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Artemov, S., Kuznets, R.: Logical Omniscience Via Proof Complexity. In: Ésik, Z. (ed.) CSL 2006. LNCS, vol. 4207, pp. 135–149. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bavera, F., Bonelli, E.: Justification Logic and History Based Computation. In: Cavalcanti, A., Deharbe, D., Gaudel, M.-C., Woodcock, J. (eds.) ICTAC 2010. LNCS, vol. 6255, pp. 337–351. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bonelli, E., Feller, F.: The Logic of Proofs as a Foundation for Certifying Mobile Computation. In: Artemov, S., Nerode, A. (eds.) LFCS 2009. LNCS, vol. 5407, pp. 76–91. Springer, Heidelberg (2009), Errata available at, http://www.lifia.info.unlp.edu.ar/eduardo/publications/errataLFCS09.txt CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fitting, M.: The logic of proofs, semantically. Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 132(1), 1–25 (2005)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fitting, M., Mendelsohn, R.L.: First-Order Modal Logic. Kluwer Academic Press (1998)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gödel, K.: Eine interpretation des intuitionistischen aussagenkalküls. Ergebnisse Math. Colloq. 4, 39–40 (1933)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Halpern, J.: Reasoning About Uncertainty. MIT Press (2003)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kripke, S.A.: Semantical analysis of modal logic i. normal propositional calculi. Zeitschrift fur Mathematische Logik und Grundlagen der Mathematik 9, 67–96 (1963)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kuznets, R.: On the Complexity of Explicit Modal Logics. In: Clote, P.G., Schwichtenberg, H. (eds.) CSL 2000. LNCS, vol. 1862, pp. 371–383. Springer, Heidelberg (2000); Errata concerning the explicit counterparts of \(\mathcal{D}\) and \(\mathcal{D}4\) are published as [17] CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kuznets, R.: On decidability of the logic of proofs with arbitrary constant specifications. In: 2004 Annual Meeting of the Association for Symbolic Logic, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, May 19–23. Association for Symbolic Logic, p. 111 (March 2005) (Abstract)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kuznets, R.: Complexity Issues in Justification Logic. PhD thesis, CUNY Graduate Center (May 2008)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kuznets, R.: Complexity through tableaux in justification logic. In: 2008 European Summer Meeting of the Association for Symbolic Logic, Logic Colloquium 2008, Bern, Switzerland, July 3-8. Bulletin of Symbolic Logic, vol. 15(1), p. 121. Association for Symbolic Logic (March 2009) (Abstract)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Milnikel, R.S.: Derivability in certain subsystems of the Logic of Proofs is \(\Pi^p_2\)-complete. Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 145(3), 223–239 (2007)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mkrtychev, A.: Models for the Logic of Proofs. In: Adian, S., Nerode, A. (eds.) LFCS 1997. LNCS, vol. 1234, pp. 266–275. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Renne, B.: Propositional games with explicit strategies. Information and Computation 207(10), 1015–1043 (2009); Published online April 2009Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sedlár, I., Podroužek, J.: Justification logic as dynamic epistemic logic? In: Arrazola, X., Ponte, M. (eds.) Proceedings of the Second ILCLI International Workshop on Logic and Philosophy of Knowledge, Communication and Action, LogKCA 2010, pp. 431–442. University of the Basque Country Press (2010)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Studer, T.: An application of justification logic to protocol verification. In: Proceedings of the 2011 Seventh International Conference on Computational Intelligence and Security, CIS 2011, pp. 779–783. IEEE (2011)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Studer, T.: Justification logic, inference tracking, and data privacy. Logic and Logical Philosophy 20(4), 297–306 (2011)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bob Milnikel
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of MathematicsKenyon CollegeGambierUSA

Personalised recommendations