On the transitivity of Logical Consequence without Assuming Monotonicity - presented by Lin Chen and Prof. Xuefeng Wen

On the transitivity of Logical Consequence without Assuming Monotonicity

Lin Chen and Xuefeng Wen

Lin ChenProf. Xuefeng Wen
Ask the seminar a question! BETA
On the transitivity of Logical Consequence without Assuming Monotonicity
Lin Chen
Lin Chen
Sun Yat-sen University
Prof. Xuefeng Wen
Xuefeng Wen
Sun Yat-sen University
Logica Universalis

Associated Logica Universalis article

L. Chen and X. Wen (2024) On the Transitivity of Logical Consequence without Assuming Monotonicity. Logica Universalis
Article of record

We generalize Ripley’s results on the transitivity of consequence relation, without assuming a logic to be monotonic. Following Gabbay, we assume nonmonotonic consequence relation to be inclusive and cautious monotonic, and figure out the implications between different forms of transitivity of logical consequence. Weaker frameworks without inclusiveness or cautious monotonicity are also discussed. The paper may provide basis for the study of both non-transitive logics and nonmonotonic ones.

References
  • 1.
    L. Chen and X. Wen (2024) On the Transitivity of Logical Consequence without Assuming Monotonicity. Logica Universalis
  • 2.
    D. Ripley (2017) On the ‘transitivity’ of consequence relations. Journal of Logic and Computation
  • 3.
    D. M. Gabbay (1985) Theoretical Foundations for Non-Monotonic Reasoning in Expert Systems.
  • 4.
    D. J. Shoesmith and T. J. Smiley (1978) Multiple-Conclusion Logic.
  • 5.
    S. Kraus et al. (1990) Nonmonotonic reasoning, preferential models and cumulative logics. Artificial Intelligence
Logica Universalis logo
Logica Universalis Webinars
Logica Universalis
Cite as
L. Chen and X. Wen (2024, February 28), On the transitivity of Logical Consequence without Assuming Monotonicity
Share
Details
Listed seminar This seminar is open to all
Recorded Available to all
Video length 1:13:24
Q&A Now closed
Disclaimer The views expressed in this seminar are those of the speakers and not necessarily those of the journal