|
|
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| '''Neighborhood semantics''', also known as '''Scott-Montague semantics''', is a formal semantics for modal logics. It is a generalization, developed independently by [[Dana Scott]] and [[Richard Montague]], of the more widely known [[Kripke semantics|relational semantics]] for modal logic. Whereas a [[Kripke frame|relational frame]] <math>\langle W,R\rangle</math> consists of a set ''W'' of worlds (or states) and an [[accessibility relation]] ''R'' intended to indicate which worlds are alternatives to (or, accessible from) others, a '''neighborhood frame''' <math>\langle W,N\rangle</math> still has a set ''W'' of worlds, but has instead of an accessibility relation a ''neighborhood function'' | | Marvella is what you can contact her but it's not the most female name out there. My working day job is a meter reader. For a while I've been in South Dakota and my parents reside nearby. To do aerobics is a thing that I'm completely addicted to.<br><br>Also visit my web blog :: std home test ([http://dev.adaptationlearning.net/solid-advice-regards-yeast-infection click the up coming webpage]) |
| | |
| : <math> N : W \to 2^{2^W} </math>
| |
| | |
| that assigns to each element of ''W'' a set of subsets of ''W''. Intuitively, each family of subsets assigned to a world are the propositions necessary at that world, where 'proposition' is defined as a subset of ''W'' (i.e. the set of worlds at which the proposition is true). Specifically, if ''M'' is a model on the frame, then | |
| | |
| : <math> M,w\models\square A \Longleftrightarrow (A)^M \in N(w), </math>
| |
| | |
| where
| |
| | |
| : <math>(A)^M = \{u\in W \mid M,u\models A \}</math> | |
| | |
| is the ''truth set'' of ''A''.
| |
| | |
| Neighborhood semantics is used for the classical modal logics that are strictly weaker than the [[normal modal logic]] '''K'''.
| |
| | |
| ==Correspondence between relational and neighborhood models==
| |
| | |
| To every relational model M = (W,R,V) there corresponds an equivalent (in the sense of having point-wise equivalent modal theories) neighborhood model M' = (W,N,V) defined by
| |
| | |
| : <math> N(w) = \{(A)^M: M,w\models\Box A\}. </math> | |
| | |
| The fact that the converse fails gives a precise sense to the remark that neighborhood models are a generalization of relational ones. Another (perhaps more natural) generalization of relational structures are [[general frame|general relational structures]].
| |
| | |
| ==References==
| |
| | |
| * Scott, D. "Advice in modal logic", in ''Philosophical Problems in Logic'', ed. Karel Lambert. Reidel, 1970.
| |
| * Montague, R. "Universal Grammar", ''Theoria'' 36, 373-98, 1970.
| |
| * Chellas, B.F. ''Modal Logic''. Cambridge University Press, 1980.
| |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| [[Category:Modal logic]]
| |
| | |
| | |
| {{logic-stub}}
| |
Marvella is what you can contact her but it's not the most female name out there. My working day job is a meter reader. For a while I've been in South Dakota and my parents reside nearby. To do aerobics is a thing that I'm completely addicted to.
Also visit my web blog :: std home test (click the up coming webpage)