Skip to main content
Log in

About the Unification Type of Modal Logics Between \(\mathbf {KB}\) and \(\mathbf {KTB}\)

  • Published:
Studia Logica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The unification problem in a normal modal logic is to determine, given a formula \(\varphi \), whether there exists a substitution \(\sigma \) such that \(\sigma (\varphi )\) is in that logic. In that case, \(\sigma \) is a unifier of \(\varphi \). We shall say that a set of unifiers of a unifiable formula \(\varphi \) is minimal complete if for all unifiers \(\sigma \) of \(\varphi \), there exists a unifier \(\tau \) of \(\varphi \) in that set such that \(\tau \) is more general than \(\sigma \) and for all \(\sigma ,\tau \) in that set, \(\sigma \not =\tau \), neither \(\sigma \) is more general than \(\tau \), nor \(\tau \) is more general than \(\sigma \). When a unifiable formula has no minimal complete set of unifiers, the formula is nullary. We usually distinguish between elementary unification and unification with parameters. In elementary unification, all variables are likely to be replaced by formulas when one applies a substitution. In unification with parameters, some variables—called parameters—remain unchanged. In this paper, we prove that normal modal logics \(\mathbf {KB}\), \(\mathbf {KDB}\) and \(\mathbf {KTB}\) as well as infinitely many normal modal logics between \(\mathbf {KDB}\) and \(\mathbf {KTB}\) possess nullary formulas for unification with parameters.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Baader, F., and S. Ghilardi, Unification in modal and description logics, Logic Journal of the IGPL 19:705–730, 2011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Baader, F., and W. Snyder, Unification theory, in Handbook of Automated Reasoning, Elsevier, 2001, pp. 439–526.

  3. Balbiani, P., Remarks about the unification type of some non-symmetric non-transitive modal logics, Logic Journal of the IGPL 27:639–658, 2019.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Balbiani, P., and Ç. Gencer,\(KD\) is nullary, Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics 27:196–205, 2017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Balbiani, P., and Ç. Gencer, Unification in epistemic logics, Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics 27:91–105, 2017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Balbiani, P., I. Shapirovsky, and V. Shehtman, Every world can see a Sahlqvist world, in Advances in Modal Logic, College Publications, 2006, pp. 69–85.

  7. Balbiani, P., and T. Tinchev, Unification in modal logic \(Alt_{1}\), in Advances in Modal Logic, College Publications, 2016, pp. 117–134.

  8. Balbiani, P., and T. Tinchev, Elementary unification in modal logic \(KD45\), Journal of Applied Logic — IFCoLog Journal of Logics and their Applications 5:301–317, 2018.

  9. Blackburn, P., M. de Rijke, and Y. Venema,Modal Logic, Cambridge University Press, 2001.

  10. Chagrov, A., and M. Zakharyaschev,Modal Logic, Oxford University Press, 1997.

  11. Chellas, B., Modal Logic. An Introduction, Cambridge University Press, 1980.

  12. Dzik, W., Unification Types in Logic, Wydawnicto Uniwersytetu Slaskiego, 2007.

  13. Dzik, W., and P. Wojtylak, Projective unification in modal logic, Logic Journal of the IGPL 20:121–153, 2012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Ghilardi, S., Best solving modal equations, Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 102:183–198, 2000.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Jer̆ábek, E., Complexity of admissible rules, Archive for Mathematical Logic 46:73–92, 2007.

  16. Jer̆ábek, E., Blending margins: the modal logic K has nullary unification type, Journal of Logic and Computation 25:1231–1240, 2015.

  17. Jer̆ábek, E., Rules with parameters in modal logic I, Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 166:881–933, 2015.

  18. Kurucz, A., Combining modal logics, in Handbook of Modal Logic, Elsevier, 2007, pp. 869–924.

  19. Rybakov, V., A criterion for admissibility of rules in the model system S4 and the intuitionistic logic, Algebra and Logic 23:369–384, 1984.

  20. Rybakov, V., Admissibility of Logical Inference Rules, Elsevier Science, 1997.

Download references

Acknowledgements

This paper has been written on the occasion of a 3-months visit of Çiğdem Gencer during the Fall 2018 in Toulouse that was financially supported by Université Paul Sabatier (“Professeurs invités 2018”). We make a point of thanking Maryam Rostamigiv (Toulouse University, France) and Tinko Tinchev (Sofia University St. Kliment Ohridski, Bulgaria) for their valuable remarks. We also express our gratitude to our referees for their helpful feedback: referee \(\sharp 1\) who has suggested the proof of Proposition 4 and referee \(\sharp 2\) who has continuously stressed the importance of presenting our results as clearly as possible.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Philippe Balbiani.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Balbiani, P., Gencer, Ç. About the Unification Type of Modal Logics Between \(\mathbf {KB}\) and \(\mathbf {KTB}\). Stud Logica 108, 941–966 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11225-019-09883-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11225-019-09883-0

Keywords

Navigation