{"title":"非分配逻辑的博弈论语义","authors":"C. Hartonas","doi":"10.1093/JIGPAL/JZY079","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We introduce game-theoretic semantics for systems without the conveniences of either a De Morgan negation, or of distribution of conjunction over disjunction and conversely. Much of game playing rests on challenges issued by one player to the other to satisfy, or refute, a sentence, while forcing him/her to move to some other place in the game’s chessboard-like configuration. Correctness of the game-theoretic semantics is proven for both a training game, corresponding to Positive Lattice Logic and for more advanced games for the logics of lattices with weak negation and modal operators (Modal Lattice Logic).","PeriodicalId":304915,"journal":{"name":"Log. J. IGPL","volume":"43 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Game-theoretic semantics for non-distributive logics\",\"authors\":\"C. Hartonas\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/JIGPAL/JZY079\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We introduce game-theoretic semantics for systems without the conveniences of either a De Morgan negation, or of distribution of conjunction over disjunction and conversely. Much of game playing rests on challenges issued by one player to the other to satisfy, or refute, a sentence, while forcing him/her to move to some other place in the game’s chessboard-like configuration. Correctness of the game-theoretic semantics is proven for both a training game, corresponding to Positive Lattice Logic and for more advanced games for the logics of lattices with weak negation and modal operators (Modal Lattice Logic).\",\"PeriodicalId\":304915,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Log. J. IGPL\",\"volume\":\"43 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-09-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Log. J. IGPL\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/JIGPAL/JZY079\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Log. J. IGPL","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/JIGPAL/JZY079","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Game-theoretic semantics for non-distributive logics
We introduce game-theoretic semantics for systems without the conveniences of either a De Morgan negation, or of distribution of conjunction over disjunction and conversely. Much of game playing rests on challenges issued by one player to the other to satisfy, or refute, a sentence, while forcing him/her to move to some other place in the game’s chessboard-like configuration. Correctness of the game-theoretic semantics is proven for both a training game, corresponding to Positive Lattice Logic and for more advanced games for the logics of lattices with weak negation and modal operators (Modal Lattice Logic).