SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2606.31854

Coequivalence Relations and Descent in Modal Logic

Abstract

A coequivalence relation over a modal logic L is a formula in two tuples of propositional variables of the same length such that the logic L proves it to be an equivalence relation. They were introduced by Ghilardi and Zawadowski in the context of the categorical study of non-classical logics. A coequivalence relation is said to separate variables or to be separating if it corresponds to a collection of formulas, which serve as explicit definitions of quotients. A logic L where all coequivalence relations are separating is said to have the coequivalence separation property (CoSP). Ghilardi and Zawadowski showed that CoSP fails for IPC. In previous work, the second author showed that such a phenomenon happens already in presumably simpler systems like S5. Ghilardi and Zawadowski therefore raised the question whether a weaker property, formulated in categorical terms related to descent theory, was still true. In this paper, we identify the logical meaning of such a property in relation to CoSP. We introduce the notion of local coequivalence relations, which have the additional structure of a local transition term, intuitively capturing the structure of elements lying in the same fiber. We introduce the local coequivalence separation property (LCoSP), and prove it to be equivalent, in good cases, to the almost Barr-exactness of the category dual to finitely presented algebras. We conclude by showing that S5 has the LCoSP.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Rodrigo Nicolau Almeida, Matteo De Berardinis. 2026-06-30. Coequivalence Relations and Descent in Modal Logic. https://doi.org/10.4204/eptcs.447.4

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

There is no maximal $K$-degree

The Kolmogorov complexity of a string characterize how complex it is to describe the string. If every prefix of a real $x$ is more complex to describe than every prefix (of the same length) of real $y$, then it is seen as $x$ is more complex to describe than $y$. It is wondered if there is a real $x$ so that no other reals are strictly more complex (to describe) than $x$. The behavior of Kolmogorov complexity functions generated by reals (namely $n\mapsto$ the minimal description length of the real) is quite chaos. Therefore, it is widely believed that there are many reals that are maximally complex to describe. For instance, it is conjectured that all random enough reals have maximal $K$-degree. In this paper, it is shown that there is no real with maximal $K$-degree. Actually, for almost all real $x$, we can uniformly computably find another real whose $K$-degree is strictly above $x$.

math.LO

Quadruples and cubes

We prove, in $\mathsf{ZFC}$, that the $\lambda$-terraced cube relation fails whenever $\lambda$ is an uncountable cardinal. The corresponding terraced relation for quadruples fails for every $\lambda$. If $\lambda$ is $\aleph_0$ then the pretinent terraced relation has consistency strength of at least one Woodin cardinal. We prove positive polarized relations at a successor and a double successor from wondrous ideals. We show, however, that there are no such ideals over two consecutive cardinals simultaneously.

math.LO

Possibilistic Logic over a Logic of Formal Inconsistency

In this article, we have introduced a new possibilistic logic on a logic of formal inconsistency with the aim of developing a possibility theoretic framework to deal with uncertainty and inconsistency meaningfully without leading to a system collapse. We have discussed the syntax and semantics for this logic and have proved the soundness and completeness theorems. A set of new measures of consistency, contradictoriness, and triviality of a set of formulas have been defined. These have then been put to use in an example to show that this framework can provide better means of machine reasoning.

math.LO