Johan van Benthem

Johan van Benthem, Balder ten Cate, Xi Yang

We study which classic modal definability and preservation results survive when attention is restricted to finite structures, where many first-order transfer theorems are known to break down. Several semantic characterizations for modal formula classes survive the passage to the finite, while a number of first-order preservation theorems for basic frame operations fail. Our main positive result is that the Bisimulation Safety Theorem does transfer to finite structures. We also discuss computability aspects, and analogues in the finite for the Goldblatt-Thomason theorem and for modal correspondence theory.

Johan van Benthem, Thomas Icard

Reasoning with quantifier expressions in natural language combines logical and arithmetical features, transcending strict divides between qualitative and quantitative. Our topic is this cooperation of styles as it occurs in common linguistic usage and its extension into the broader practice of natural language plus "grassroots mathematics". We begin with a brief review of first-order logic with counting operators and cardinality comparisons. This system is known to be of high complexity, and drowns out finer aspects of the combination of logic and counting. We move to a small fragment that can represent numerical syllogisms and basic reasoning about comparative size: monadic first-order logic with counting. We provide normal forms that allow for axiomatization, determine which arithmetical notions can be defined on finite and on infinite models, and conversely, we discuss which logical notions can be defined out of purely arithmetical ones, and what sort of (non-)classical logics can be induced. Next, we investigate a series of strengthenings, again using normal form methods. The monadic second-order version is close, in a precise sense, to additive Presburger Arithmetic, while versions with the natural device of tuple counting take us to Diophantine equations, making the logic undecidable. We also define a system that combines basic modal logic over binary accessibility relations with counting, needed to formulate ubiquitous reasoning patterns such as the Pigeonhole Principle. We return to our starting point in natural language, confronting the architecture of our formal systems with linguistic quantifier vocabulary and syntax. We conclude with some general thoughts on yet further entanglements of logic and counting in formal systems, on rethinking the qualitative/quantitative divide, and on connecting our analysis to empirical findings in cognitive science.

Johan van Benthem, David Fernández-Duque, Eric Pacuit

The intuitive notion of evidence has both semantic and syntactic features. In this paper, we develop an {\em evidence logic} for epistemic agents faced with possibly contradictory evidence from different sources. The logic is based on a neighborhood semantics, where a neighborhood $N$ indicates that the agent has reason to believe that the true state of the world lies in $N$. Further notions of relative plausibility between worlds and beliefs based on the latter ordering are then defined in terms of this evidence structure, yielding our intended models for evidence-based beliefs. In addition, we also consider a second more general flavor, where belief and plausibility are modeled using additional primitive relations, and we prove a representation theorem showing that each such general model is a $p$-morphic image of an intended one. This semantics invites a number of natural special cases, depending on how uniform we make the evidence sets, and how coherent their total structure. We give a structural study of the resulting `uniform' and `flat' models. Our main result are sound and complete axiomatizations for the logics of all four major model classes with respect to the modal language of evidence, belief and safe belief. We conclude with an outlook toward logics for the dynamics of changing evidence, and the resulting language extensions and connections with logics of plausibility change.