PDL with Intersection and Converse Is Decidable

Propositional dynamic logic with local assignment

There has been a significant interest in modal logics with intersection, prominent examples including epistemic and doxastic logics with distributed knowledge, propositional dynamic logic with intersection, and description logics with concept intersection. Completeness proofs for such logics tend to be complicated, in particular on model classes such as S5 used, e.g., in standard epistemic logic, mainly due to the undefinability of intersection of modalities in standard modal logic. A standard proof method for the S5 case uses an “unraveling-folding” technique to achieve a treelike model to deal with the problem of undefinability. This method, however, is not easily adapted to other logics, due to its reliance on S5 in a number of steps. In this paper we demonstrate a simpler and more general proof technique by building a treelike canonical model directly, which avoids the complications in the processes of unraveling and folding. We illustrate the technique by showing completeness of the normal modal logics K, D, T, B, S4 and S5 extended with intersection modalities. Furthermore, these treelike canonical models are compatible with Fischer-Ladner-style closures, and we combine the methods to show the completeness of the mentioned logics further extended with transitive closure of union modalities known from PDL or epistemic logic. Some of these completeness results are new.

In classical deterministic planning, solutions to planning tasks are simply sequences of actions, but that is not sufficient for contingent plans in non-deterministic environments. Contingent plans are often expressed through policies that map states to actions. An alternative is to specify contingent plans as programs, e.g. in the syntax of Propositional Dynamic Logic (PDL). PDL is a logic for reasoning about programs with sequential composition, test and non-deterministic choice. However, as we show in the paper, none of the existing PDL modalities directly captures the notion of a solution to a planning task under non-determinism. We add a new modality to star-free PDL correctly capturing this notion. We prove the appropriateness of the new modality by showing how to translate back and forth between policies and PDL programs under the new modality. More precisely, we show how a policy solution to a planning task gives rise to a program solution expressed via the new modality, and vice versa. We also provide an axiomatisation of our PDL extension through reduction axioms into standard star-free PDL.

It is an open problem whether definability in Propositional Dynamic Logic (PDL) on forests is decidable. Based on an algebraic characterization by Boja\'nczyk, et. al.,(2012) in terms of forest algebras, Straubing (2013) described an approach to PDL based on a k-fold iterated distributive law. A proof that all languages satisfying such a k-fold iterated distributive law are in PDL would settle decidability of PDL. We solve this problem in the case k=2: All languages recognized by forest algebras satisfying a 2-fold iterated distributive law are in PDL. Furthermore, we show that this class is decidable. This provides a novel nontrivial decidable subclass of PDL, and demonstrates the viability of the proposed approach to deciding PDL in general.

Propositional dynamic logic of nonregular programs

Determinism and non-determinism in PDL

Deterministic process logic is elementary

The completeness proofs for Propositional Dynamic Logic (PDL) in the literature are non-constructive and usually presented in an informal manner. We obtain a formal and constructive completeness proof for Converse PDL by recasting a completeness proof by Kozen and Parikh into our constructive setting. We base our proof on a Pratt-style decision method for satisfiability constructing finite models for satisfiable formulas and pruning refutations for unsatisfiable formulas. Completeness of Segerberg's axiomatization of PDL is then obtained by translating pruning refutations to derivations in the Hilbert system. We first treat PDL without converse and then extend the proofs to Converse PDL. All results are formalized in Coq/Ssreflect.

We investigate the relationship amongst some solutions to the frame problem. We encode Pednault’s syntax-based solution [20], Baker’s state-minimization policy [1], and Gelfond & Lifchitz’s Action Language A [7] in the propositional dynamic logic (PDL).T he formal relationships among these solutions are given. The results of the paper show that dynamic logic, as one of the formalisms for reasoning about dynamic domains, can be used as a formal tool for comparing and unifying logics of action.Keywordsrelationships between formalismsframe problemdynamic logic

Description logics provide powerful languages for representing and reasoning about knowledge of static application domains. The main strength of description logics is that they offer considerable expressive power going far beyond propositional logic, while reasoning is still decidable. There is a demand to bring the power and character of description logics into the description and reasoning of dynamic application domains which are characterized by actions. In this paper, based on a combination of the propositional dynamic logic PDL, a family of description logics and an action formalism constructed over description logics, we propose a family of dynamic description logics DDL(X @) for representing and reasoning about actions, where X represents well-studied description logics ranging from the to the , and X @ denotes the extension of X with the @ constructor. The representation power of DDL(X @) is reflected in four aspects. Firstly, the static knowledge of application domains is represented as RBoxes and acyclic TBoxes of the description logic X. Secondly, the states of the world and the pre-conditions of atomic actions are described by ABox assertions of the description logic X @, and the post-conditions of atomic actions are described by primitive literals of X @. Thirdly, starting with atomic actions and ABox assertions of X @, complex actions are constructed with regular program constructors of PDL, so that various control structures on actions such as the "Sequence", "Choice", "Any-Order", "Iterate", "If-Then-Else", "Repeat-While" and "Repeat-Until" can be represented. Finally, both atomic actions and complex actions are used as modal operators for the construction of formulas, so that many properties on actions can be explicitly stated by formulas. A tableau-algorithm is provided for deciding the satisfiability of DDL(X @)-formulas; based on this algorithm, reasoning tasks such as the realizability, executability and projection of actions can be effectively carried out. As a result, DDL(X @) not only offers considerable expressive power going beyond many action formalisms which are propositional, but also provides decidable reasoning services for actions described by it.

A logic framework for reasoning with movement based on fuzzy qualitative representation

We introduce dynamic algebras and show how they can be used to give an algebraic interpretation to propositional dynamic logic (PDL). Dynamic algebras include all Kripke models, the standard interpretation of PDL. We give a simple algebraic condition on *-free dynamic algebras that is necessary and sufficient for representation by *-free Kripke models. In the presence of*, the condition is sufficient for representation by a nonstandard Kripke model. This result leads to a duality between certain topological Kripke models and dynamic algebras analogous to the duality between Boolean algebras and their Stone spaces.

1 - Structures, Languages and Translations: the Structural Approach to Feature Logic

Agent-based systems have gained immense popularity in the last decade or so. Reasoning methods such as planning and decision-making under uncertainty applied to agents and multi-agent systems is an important area of research in agent-based systems. Most works in planning in uncertain environments incorporate sensing actions. We wish to address planning problems when there are no such sensing actions. For this, we introduce the notion of ‘try actions’ and develop a logic PDL_try that is an extension to propositional dynamic logic (PDL). The logic also allows specification of the implicit knowledge of an agent. We illustrate planning in our logic with a new adaptation of the popular blocks world domain. Example programs (plans) are discussed in detail for single agent and two agent situations.

Propositional Dynamic Logic can be extended to include both an infinitary iteration construct delta and a backtracking construct converse. The resulting logic does not satisfy the finite model property, but is nevertheless elementarily decidable. In order to establish this decidability result, deterministic two-way automata on infinite trees are defined and shown to be reducible to nondeterministic one-way automata on infinite trees. The decision procedure suggests a nonstandard semantics for the extended logic for which the finite model property does hold.