A Tableau System for Quasi-Hybrid Logic

  • Diana Costa
  • Manuel A. MartinsEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9706)


Hybrid logic is a valuable tool for specifying relational structures, at the same time that allows defining accessibility relations between states, it provides a way to nominate and make mention to what happens at each specific state. However, due to the many sources nowadays available, we may need to deal with contradictory information. This is the reason why we came with the idea of Quasi-hybrid logic, which is a paraconsistent version of hybrid logic capable of dealing with inconsistencies in the information, written as hybrid formulas.

In [5] we have already developed a semantics for this paraconsistent logic. In this paper we go a step forward, namely we study its proof-theoretical aspects. We present a complete tableau system for Quasi-hybrid logic, by combining both tableaux for Quasi-classical and Hybrid logics.



We are very grateful to J. Marcos for productive discussions, in several related topics, that were very important for achieving the reported results. We would also like to mention that the careful work of the anonymous reviewers have improved the quality of the present paper.

This work was supported in part by the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT) through CIDMA within project UID/MAT/04106/2013 and the project EU FP7 Marie Curie PIRSES-GA-2012-318986 GeTFun: Generalizing Truth-Functionality. Diana Costa also thanks the support of FCT via the Ph.D. scholarship PD/BD/105730/2014, and the Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation through the Research Stimulus Program 2015 (Programa de Estímulo à Investigação 2015).


  1. 1.
    Blackburn, P.: Representation, reasoning, and relational structures: a hybrid logic manifesto. Log. J. IGPL 8(3), 339–365 (2000)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Boolos, G.S., Burgess, J.P., Jeffrey, R.C.: Computability and Logic, 5th edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2007)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Braüner, T.: Hybrid Logic and Its Proof-Theory. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Costa, D., Martins, M.: Inconsistencies in health care knowledge. In: 2014 IEEE 16th International Conference on e-Health Networking, Applications and Services (Healthcom), pp. 37–42, October 2014Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Costa, D., Martins, M.: Paraconsistency in hybrid logic. Accepted in the Journal of Logic and Computation (2016).
  6. 6.
    Grant, J., Hunter, A.: Measuring inconsistency in knowledge bases. J. Intell. Inf. Syst. 27(2), 159–184 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Grant, J., Hunter, A.: Analysing inconsistent first-order knowledge bases. Artif. Intell. 172(8–9), 1064–1093 (2008)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hunter, A.: A semantic tableau version of first-order quasi-classical logic. In: Benferhat, S., Besnard, P. (eds.) ECSQARU 2001. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2143, pp. 544–555. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Odintsov, S.P., Wansing, H.: Modal logics with Belnapian truth values. J. Appl. Non-Class. Logics 20(3), 279–304 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rivieccio, U., Jung, A., Jansana, R.: Four-valued modal logic: Kripke semantics and duality. J. Logic Comput. (2015). doi: 10.1093/logcom/exv038 Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CIDMA - Department MathematicsUniversity AveiroAveiroPortugal

Personalised recommendations