On correspondence of standard modalities and negative ones on the basis of regular and quasi-regular logics (Q831227)

In a paper of 2006, \textit{J.-Y. Béziau} [Log. Log. Philos. 15, No. 2, 99--111 (2006; Zbl 1134.03018)] considered a formulation of S5 with a single modal operator, understood intuitively as `not necessary', in place of the usual box operator and classical negation. In a series of papers, J. Marcos and separately the authors of the one under review generalized that idea to apply to regular modal logics. However, for non-regular ones, difficulties arise in recuperating classical negation via a bottom formula. In the paper under review, the authors get around the difficulty, for some non-regular logics, by using both `not necessary' and `necessarily not' as primitives.