Documentation

Linglib.Theories.Semantics.Dynamic.UpdateSemantics.Basic

Update Semantics #

@cite{veltman-1996}

In Update Semantics:

⟦φ⟧ : State → State where State = Set World

@[reducible, inline]

Update Semantics state: a set of possible worlds.

Unlike DPL/DRT, no assignment component - US focuses on propositional content.

Equations
Instances For

    Propositional update: eliminate worlds where φ fails.

    ⟦φ⟧(s) = { w ∈ s | φ(w) }

    Equations
    Instances For

      Conjunction: sequential update.

      ⟦φ ∧ ψ⟧ = ⟦ψ⟧ ∘ ⟦φ⟧

      Delegates to Core.CCP.seq.

      Equations
      Instances For
        noncomputable def Semantics.Dynamic.UpdateSemantics.Update.neg {W : Type u_1} (φ : Update W) :

        Negation: test and possibly fail.

        ⟦¬φ⟧(s) = s if ⟦φ⟧(s) = ∅, else ∅

        Delegates to Core.CCP.neg.

        Equations
        Instances For
          noncomputable def Semantics.Dynamic.UpdateSemantics.Update.might {W : Type u_1} (φ : Update W) :

          Epistemic "might": compatibility test.

          ⟦might φ⟧(s) = s if ⟦φ⟧(s) ≠ ∅, else ∅

          Delegates to Core.CCP.might.

          Equations
          Instances For
            noncomputable def Semantics.Dynamic.UpdateSemantics.Update.must {W : Type u_1} (φ : Update W) :

            Epistemic "must": universal test.

            ⟦must φ⟧(s) = s if ⟦φ⟧(s) = s, else ∅

            Delegates to Core.CCP.must.

            Equations
            Instances For
              theorem Semantics.Dynamic.UpdateSemantics.might_is_test {W : Type u_1} (φ : Update W) (s : State W) (h : Set.Nonempty (φ s)) :
              φ.might s = s

              Might is a TEST: it doesn't change the state (if it passes).

              Order matters for epistemic might.

              "It's raining and it might not be raining" is contradictory: after learning rain, the might-not-rain test fails (no ¬rain worlds remain). But "it might not be raining and it's raining" can succeed: the might test passes on the initial state, then learning eliminates ¬rain worlds.

              Requires Nontrivial W: for empty or singleton W, no state has both p-worlds and ¬p-worlds, making the second conjunct unsatisfiable.

              State s supports φ iff updating with φ doesn't change s.

              s ⊨ φ iff ⟦φ⟧(s) = s

              Equations
              Instances For

                State s accepts φ iff updating with φ yields a non-empty state.

                s accepts φ iff ⟦φ⟧(s) ≠ ∅

                Equations
                Instances For
                  def Semantics.Dynamic.UpdateSemantics.valid₁ {W : Type u_1} (premises : List (Update W)) (conclusion : Update W) :

                  Validity₁: updating the minimal state 0 with the premises in order yields a state that supports the conclusion.

                  ψ₁,...,ψₙ ⊩₁ φ iff 0[ψ₁]⋯[ψₙ] ⊨ φ

                  @cite{veltman-1996}, §1.2. This is the notion Veltman concentrates on: it captures the fact that default conclusions depend on exactly what information is available.

                  Equations
                  • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                  Instances For
                    def Semantics.Dynamic.UpdateSemantics.valid₂ {W : Type u_1} (premises : List (Update W)) (conclusion : Update W) :

                    Validity₂: for every state σ, updating with the premises in order yields a state that supports the conclusion.

                    ψ₁,...,ψₙ ⊩₂ φ iff ∀σ, σ[ψ₁]⋯[ψₙ] ⊨ φ

                    Equations
                    • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                    Instances For
                      def Semantics.Dynamic.UpdateSemantics.valid₃ {W : Type u_1} (premises : List (Update W)) (conclusion : Update W) :

                      Validity₃: one cannot accept all premises without accepting the conclusion. Closest to the classical notion.

                      ψ₁,...,ψₙ ⊩₃ φ iff ∀σ, (σ ⊨ ψ₁ ∧ ... ∧ σ ⊨ ψₙ) → σ ⊨ φ

                      Equations
                      • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                      Instances For
                        theorem Semantics.Dynamic.UpdateSemantics.valid₂_imp_valid₁ {W : Type u_1} (premises : List (Update W)) (conclusion : Update W) :
                        valid₂ premises conclusionvalid₁ premises conclusion

                        Validity₂ implies validity₁: specializing σ = 0.

                        @cite{veltman-1996}, Proposition 1.3 (one direction, unconditional).

                        theorem Semantics.Dynamic.UpdateSemantics.valid₃_monotone {W : Type u_1} (premises extra : List (Update W)) (conclusion : Update W) :
                        valid₃ premises conclusionvalid₃ (premises ++ extra) conclusion

                        Validity₃ is monotonic: adding premises preserves validity.

                        @cite{veltman-1996}, §1.2: validity₃ is the only notion that is both left and right monotonic.