A modal logic amalgam of classical and intuitionistic propositional logic
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
A famous result, conjectured by G"odel in 1932 and proved by McKinsey and Tarski in 1948, says that varphi is a theorem of intuitionistic propositional logic IPC iff its G"odel-translation varphi' is a theorem of modal logic S4. In this paper, we extend an intuitionistic version of modal logic S1+SP, introduced in our previous paper (S. Lewitzka, Algebraic semantics for a modal logic close to S1, J. Logic and Comp., doi:10.1093/logcom/exu067) to a classical modal logic L and prove the following: a propositional formula varphi is a theorem of IPC iff squarevarphi is a theorem of L (actually, we show: PhivdashIPCvarphi iff squarePhivdashLsquarevarphi, for propositional Phi,varphi). Thus, the map varphimapstosquarevarphi is an embedding of IPC into L, i.e. L contains a copy of IPC. Moreover, L is a conservative extension of classical propositional logic CPC. In this sense, L is an amalgam of CPC and IPC. We show that L is sound and complete w.r.t. a class of special Heyting algebras with a (non-normal) modal operator.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 9 Jun 2013.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2023: 1; 2024: 0; 2025: 1.
2 papers.
- 2025From Knowledge to Conjectures: A Modal Framework for Reasoning about Hypothesescited by 1
- 2023Belief, knowledge and evidencecited by 0
- 2025From Knowledge to Conjectures: A Modal Framework for Reasoning about Hypotheses10 Aug 2025
- 2023Belief, knowledge and evidence3 Apr 2023