Bundled fragments of first-order modal logic: (un)decidability

DOI10.4230/LIPICS.FSTTCS.2018.43zbMATH Open1528.03140arXiv1803.10508MaRDI QIDQ6299685FDOQ6299685

Authors: R. Ramanujam, Yanjing Wang 

Publication date: 28 March 2018

Abstract: Quantified modal logic provides a natural logical language for reasoning about modal attitudes even while retaining the richness of quantification for referring to predicates over domains. But then most fragments of the logic are undecidable, over many model classes. Over the years, only a few fragments (such as the monodic) have been shown to be decidable. In this paper, we study fragments that bundle quantifiers and modalities together, inspired by earlier work on epistemic logics of know-how/why/what. As always with quantified modal logics, it makes a significant difference whether the domain stays the same across worlds, or not. In particular, we show that the bundle $forallBox$ is undecidable over constant domain interpretations, even with only monadic predicates, whereas $existsBox$ bundle is decidable. On the other hand, over increasing domain interpretations, we get decidability with both $forallBox$ and $existsBox$ bundles with unrestricted predicates. In these cases, we also obtain tableau based procedures that run in PSPACE. We further show that the $existsBox$ bundle cannot distinguish between constant domain and increasing domain interpretations.

Mathematics Subject Classification ID

Modal logic (including the logic of norms) (03B45) Decidability of theories and sets of sentences (03B25)

This page was built for publication: Bundled fragments of first-order modal logic: (un)decidability

Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q6299685)