Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 2 minor 179 references

Possibility Frames and Forcing for Modal Logic

T0 review · 2 major / 2 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Possibility frames built from partial states give a strictly more general normal modal semantics than Kripke frames, characterizing continuum many unimodal logics that are Kripke-frame incomplete.

desk verdict The paper's flagship Kripke-incompleteness example has a load-bearing flaw: under the admissible valuation p = ↓R, the canonical encoding σ_R is empty, so the frame does not validate (Split), and Theorems 2.50–2.51 are not established as written. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.11768 v2 pith:CKBWPVLM submitted 2025-01-20 math.LO cs.LO

Wesley H. Holliday This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.LOcs.LO MSC 03B4503G05
keywords modallogicpossibilitysemanticspartialpossibilitiesBooleanalgebraswithoperatorsdualitytheoryregularopenKripke-frameincompletenessforcing
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper's central claim is that interpreting modal formulas over partial possibilities instead of total worlds yields a strictly more general frame semantics for normal modal logic. In the basic unimodal language, the paper asserts there are continuum many pairwise distinct normal modal logics that are characterized by full possibility frames but not by any Kripke frame. This matters because Kripke-frame incompleteness has often been treated as a defect of a logic; the result shows it is not a barrier to having a natural frame characterization. The paper also develops the three pillars of modal model theory for this semantics—duality, definability and correspondence, and completeness—anchored by a duality between full possibility frames and complete, completely additive Boolean algebras with operators.

What carries the argument

The central object is a possibility frame $\mathcal{F}=\langle S,\sqsubseteq,\{R_i\},P\rangle$, where $S$ is a poset of partial states, each $R_i$ is an accessibility relation, and $P$ is a set of admissible propositions contained in the regular open sets $\mathrm{RO}(S,\sqsubseteq)$. An admissible proposition is persistent—true at a state implies true at all refinements—and refinable—if false at a state, some refinement excludes it in every further refinement; topologically this means $X=\mathrm{int}(\mathrm{cl}(X))$ in the Alexandrov downset topology. Full possibility frames take $P=\mathrm{RO}(S,\sqsubseteq)$, and the condition $R\Leftrightarrow \mathrm{win}$, which says that accessibility is equivalent to a winning strategy in a refinement game, characterizes exactly when this choice is closed under the modal operation $\blacksquare_i$. The argument is carried by duality functors: the algebra of a frame is its regular open algebra with completely additive operators, and the frame of an algebra is its poset of proper filters (or the algebra minus its bottom element), so algebraic constructions translate into relation-on-poset constructions.

What would settle it

Concretely, apply the cited polymodal-to-unimodal reduction to the polymodal frames of the paper's continuum construction and compute whether the resulting unimodal logics remain pairwise distinct and Kripke-incomplete; if any reduced logic is Kripke-complete, or if the continuum many frames collapse to only finitely many reduced logics, then the unimodal theorem fails. A searchable test is whether a formula valid on the reduced unimodal frame would force a first-order condition such as seriality or reflexivity on every Kripke frame validating it, making the reduced logic Kripke-incomplete while still full-possibility-sound.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The core discovery is that full possibility frames are to complete, completely additive Boolean algebras with operators (CV-BAOs) what Kripke frames are to the atomic ones: dropping atomicity is exactly what makes the frame semantics broader. On this basis the paper proves that there are continuum many full possibility frames for the polymodal language whose logics are pairwise distinct and Kripke-frame inconsistent, and it states the unimodal analogue: continuum many full possibility frames whose logics are pairwise distinct and Kripke-frame incomplete. The technical heart is a frame-theoretic rendering of an algebraic construction of complete, completely additive BAOs with no atomic members, using a splitting formula that is valid because a partial state can split a proposition into two incompatible refinements, something a single world cannot do. The paper further proves that every normal modal logic is complete with respect to its filter-descriptive possibility frame built from proper filters rather than ultrafilters, a choice-free construction.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the polymodal-to-unimodal reduction invoked for the unimodal theorem preserves both Kripke-frame incompleteness and characterizability by full possibility frames, a fact the supplied text cites but does not prove.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Any logic complete with respect to Kripke frames is automatically complete with respect to full possibility frames, since every Kripke frame is a full possibility frame with a discrete refinement order.
  • There are continuum many pairwise distinct normal unimodal logics that are Kripke-frame incomplete yet characterized by full possibility frames, so Kripke incompleteness is not an obstacle to having a frame-based semantics.
  • All normal modal logics are sound and complete with respect to filter-descriptive possibility frames, and this completeness is obtained without relying on the ultrafilter axiom.
  • Every Sahlqvist logic has an atomless full possibility frame—a frame with no worlds—so the usual completeness guarantees for these logics can be witnessed entirely by partial possibilities.
  • The correspondence theory over full possibility frames has analogues of the classical first-order correspondence results, so modal formulas in the usual Sahlqvist form define first-order frame classes in this setting as well.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Inference: If the polymodal-to-unimodal reduction used in the unimodal theorem is as robust as the paper expects, the splitting phenomenon offers a blueprint for turning other Kripke-incomplete logics into full-possibility-complete ones; one could test this by searching for a pure unimodal formula analogous to the polymodal splitting formula.
  • Inference: The hierarchy of completeness notions implicit in the paper suggests that the lattice of normal modal logics between the Kripke-complete ones and all normal modal logics may be stratified by which non-atomic algebraic constructions are admitted, giving a concrete order in which to look for separating logics.
  • Inference: Because the filter-descriptive representation avoids the ultrafilter axiom, the canonical completeness proof could in principle be formalized in weak set theories, a consequence the paper does not itself draw.
  • Inference: The original, more restrictive definition of possibility frames remains an open endpoint: if it is as general as the full frames studied here, the broader regular-open definition is harmless; if not, the choice of frame condition is itself a substantive semantic commitment.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper develops a general semantics for normal modal logics based on partial possibilities rather than total worlds, building on Humberstone's possibility semantics and on connections with weak forcing. It defines possibility frames, studies their model theory (morphisms, special frame classes, interplay conditions between accessibility and refinement), proves duality theorems relating full possibility frames to complete and completely additive BAOs and filter-descriptive frames to all BAOs, and outlines definability and correspondence theory. A central advertised application is the existence of continuum many full possibility frames whose logics are Kripke-frame incomplete, with a concrete polymodal construction in §2.5 and a deferred unimodal version in §7.1.

Significance. If the main results hold, the paper would establish that full possibility frames form a genuinely more general semantics than Kripke frames for normal modal logics, while retaining a well-behaved duality theory. The paper is careful and systematic: it gives explicit first-order conditions for the basic semantic closure properties, provides concrete frame constructions, develops categorical dualities for several classes of frames, and obtains a choice-free filter representation of BAOs. These are valuable contributions independent of the specific incompleteness example. However, the flagship example in §2.5 appears to be incorrect as it stands, and because Theorem 2.50 and the promised Theorem 2.51 rest on it, the advertised completeness claim is not currently established.

major comments (2)
  1. [§2.5, Lemma 2.46 and Proposition 2.49] The claim that the frame F validates (Split) is false. Consider the admissible valuation π(p) = RO(R) \ {∅}; this set is ↓R in the frame, hence regular open and admissible, and it satisfies ⟦p⟧ ∩ RO(R) = ↓R with O = R. But by (4), σ_R = ∅, and by (5), R⁻ = ∅, which is not an element of S. Under this valuation, for every finite interval (a,b), Lemma 2.47 gives {⟨a,b⟩} ⊩ □⊳p, and since (a,b) can be properly extended to an interval still contained in R, we also have {⟨a,b⟩} ⊩ ♦⊊□⊳p; hence ¬♦⊊□⊳p fails at every singleton. The conjunct ♦+⊤ fails at every regular open, so ⟦α⟧ = ∅, and Lemma 2.46 then gives ⟦♦⊲α⟧ = ∅ rather than ↓R. Thus the consequent of (Split) is false at every state, while the antecedent is true at every state (take y′ = R as the universal Ri-successor). Therefore F does not validate (Split), and Theorem 2.50, which builds on this example, is not established as written.
  2. [§2.5, Theorem 2.51] The unimodal continuum result is stated with its proof deferred to Section 7 and described as following from Theorem 2.50, the duality theory, and 'known results about polymodal-to-unimodal reduction'. No specific reduction is identified in the material before Section 5, and no preservation statement is given for the two properties that matter: Kripke-frame incompleteness and being characterized by full possibility frames. Even after the polymodal construction in §2.5 is repaired, the unimodal theorem would require explicit preservation lemmas for the cited reduction. As presented, the headline unimodal claim is therefore conditional on facts that are not stated.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Equation (5) and surrounding text] For a < b, the expression b + |a−b|/2 is strictly greater than b, so the set O⁻ defined in (5) is not a strict subset of O; the text's assertion that 'O⁻ ⊊ O' is false as printed. The intended operation is presumably b − |a−b|/2 (or the midpoint), and the formula should be corrected consistently in (5), Lemma 2.48, and the definition of R+.
  2. [§2.5, canonical encoding for unbounded O] The notation σ_O in (4) is empty for unbounded regular opens such as O = R, since R contains no maximal open subinterval. The construction should either restrict attention to bounded regular opens or explicitly handle this case; as it stands, the 'shrinking' step is undefined for the admissible proposition ↓R.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the paper's main constructions and proofs are explicit and self-contained, and its self-citations are not load-bearing.

full rationale

The central existence result for polymodal possibility frames (Theorem 2.50) is proved by an explicit frame construction in Section 2.5: the frame F is built from regular open subsets of R and nonempty sets of pairs, with explicitly defined accessibility relations R⊲, R⊳, R⊊, and R+, and the formulas α, ϕ, and ψ are then verified by Lemmas 2.46 through 2.48 and Proposition 2.49. The validation of (Split) is derived from the semantics, not assumed as an input. The continuum-many distinct logics in Theorem 2.50 are obtained by disjoint unions with an external continuum family of Kripke frames, and the separating formulas are constructed from that family; this does not presuppose the target Kripke-incompleteness. The first inequality chain involving ML(CAV), ML(CV), and related classes is attributed to Litak 2005a and Holliday and Litak 2019, but those citations are contextual strictness results rather than inputs to the Section 2.5 construction, and they are cited as published external results. The statement after Theorem 2.50 that Theorem 2.51 will use Theorem 2.50, the paper's own duality theory, and known results about polymodal-to-unimodal reduction is a deferred proof, and reliance on an external reduction result would be a completeness or correctness consideration, not circular reasoning. Any alleged failure of the Section 2.5 validation, such as an admissible valuation p = ↓R making σ_R empty, would be a mathematical error in the proof rather than a reduction of the conclusion to its own inputs, so it is outside the circularity score.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard algebraic duality theorems and set-theoretic facts, not on fitted parameters. No free parameters appear. The main external assumptions are cited published theorems; the only assumption not fully specified in the excerpt is the polymodal-to-unimodal reduction used for the unimodal continuum result.

assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption Soundness and completeness of the basic normal modal logic K with respect to Kripke frames, and of intuitionistic modal logic HK with respect to intuitionistic modal frames (Bozic and Dosen 1984).
    Used in Corollary 2.24 and Proposition 2.27 to establish baseline completeness results; not proved in this paper.
  • standard math Godel-Gentzen double-negation translation for classical propositional logic into intuitionistic propositional logic.
    Invoked in Proposition 2.27; treated as a classical theorem.
  • domain assumption Goldblatt 1974 duality between descriptive world frames and Boolean algebras with operators.
    The paper uses this as the world-frame analogue and as an external benchmark for its filter-descriptive possibility frame duality.
  • domain assumption Thomason 1975a duality between Kripke frames and CAV-BAOs.
    Used in Sections 1 and 5 to position full possibility frames relative to Kripke frames.
  • domain assumption Strict inclusions ML(CAV) subset ML(CV) subset ML(T) subset ML(V) subset ML(ALG).
    Stated in line (1) of the introduction; first three from Litak 2005a and last from Holliday and Litak 2019, cited but not proved.
  • domain assumption Known polymodal-to-unimodal reduction results preserve the relevant frame-completeness and incompleteness properties.
    Invoked immediately before Theorem 2.51; the exact statement and proof are outside the excerpt.
  • standard math There exist continuum many Kripke frames for the unimodal language with pairwise distinct modal logics.
    Used in the proof of Theorem 2.50 and stated as a standard fact.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Possibility Frames and Forcing for Modal Logic." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/CKBWPVLM

@misc{pith2026250111768,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Possibility Frames and Forcing for Modal Logic},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/CKBWPVLM}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.11768}
}
read the original abstract

This paper develops the model theory of normal modal logics based on partial "possibilities" instead of total "worlds," following Humberstone (1981) instead of Kripke (1963). Possibility semantics can be seen as extending to modal logic the semantics for classical logic used in weak forcing in set theory, or as semanticizing a negative translation of classical modal logic into intuitionistic modal logic. Thus, possibility frames are based on posets with accessibility relations, like intuitionistic modal frames, but with the constraint that the interpretation of every formula is a regular open set in the Alexandrov topology on the poset. The standard world frames for modal logic are the special case of possibility frames wherein the poset is discrete. We develop the beginnings of duality theory, definability/correspondence theory, and completeness theory for possibility frames.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.11768 by the authors.

Figure 1.1
Figure 1.1. main categorical relationships. y ≤ x and h(y) = y ′ ; and if h(x)R′ y ′ , then ∃y: xRy and h(y) = y ′ . These maps are a special case of the strict possibility morphisms mentioned above (see § 3). Together rich possibility frames with p-morphisms form the category RichPoss. In § 5.3, we show that RichPoss is dually equivalent to CV-BAO. The rich possibility frames just sketched are a special case of the full possib… view at source ↗
Figure 1.2
Figure 1.2. classes of BAOs and semantically equivalent fra [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2.1
Figure 2.1. the up-R condition from Example 2.7. Given x ′Riy ′ , we may go up in the first coordinate to any x above x ′ to obtain xRiy ′ . A solid arrow from s to t indicates that t is a refinement of s (t ⊑ s), while a dashed arrow indicates that t is accessible from s (sRit). x y y ′ ⇒ x y y ′ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_2_1.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (21 more)
Figure 2.2
Figure 2.2. Figure 2.2: the R-down condition from Example 2.7. Given xRiy, we may go down in the second coordinate to any y ′ below y to obtain xRiy ′ . x x ′ y ′ ⇒ ∃ x x ′ y ′ y [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_2_2.png]
Figure 2.3
Figure 2.3. Figure 2.3: the R-com condition from Example 2.7. Our third example of partial-state frames will be quite important for our purposes. According to a world￾based view of possibilities, a “possibility” is simply a set of worlds; a possibility X “refines” a possibility Y iff X ⊆ Y …
Figure 2.4
Figure 2.4. Figure 2.4: the Beth comb (left) and two examples of non-regu [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_2_4.png]
Figure 2.5
Figure 2.5. Figure 2.5: a temporal flow on the Beth comb. 2.3 The Interplay of Accessibility and Refinement In this section, we will show that two first-order conditions on the interplay of Ri and ⊑ are necessary and sufficient for RO(F) to be closed under i (Proposition 2.30), so every fu…
Figure 2.6
Figure 2.6. Figure 2.6: the R-rule condition. 1. A chooses a y ′ ⊑ y; 2. E chooses an x ′ ⊑ x; 3. A chooses an x ′′ ⊑ x ′ ; if Ri(x ′′) = ∅, then A wins, otherwise play continues; 4. E chooses a y ′′ ∈ Ri(x ′′); if y ′′ ≬ y ′ , then E wins, otherwise A wins. One can think of A and E as argu…
Figure 2.7
Figure 2.7. Figure 2.7: the accessibility game G – if y ′′ ≬ y ′ , E wins, otherwise A wins. Now we will show that R-rule and R⇒win characterize closure of RO(S, ⊑) under i . Proposition 2.30 (First-order Characterization of Closure of RO(S, ⊑) under i). For any poset hS, ⊑i and binary re…
Figure 2.8
Figure 2.8. Figure 2.8: R-dense Note how the conditions above relate to the up-R condition from intuitionistic frames (Example 2.7). Fact 2.33 (Deriving up-R). For any partial-state frame F, if F satisfies R-rule, R-down, and R-dense, then F satisfies up-R. Proof. To show that x ′ ⊑ x and x…
Figure 2.9
Figure 2.9. Figure 2.9: the accessibility game G – if y ′′ ⊑ y ′ , E wins, otherwise A wins. Proposition 2.35 (Ultimate Condition). The condition R⇔win implies all of the conditions above and is implied by the conjunction of the conditions from Propositions 2.30 and 2.32: R-rule, R⇒win, R-d…
Figure 2.10
Figure 2.10. Figure 2.10: R⇔win 4. for all π: Φ → P, x ∈ S, and ϕ ∈ L(Φ, I): hF, πi, x ϕ iff hF, πi, x ϕ. Proof. For 1, we prove up-R and R-down at the same time. Suppose x ′ ⊑ x, y ′ ⊑ y and x ′R i y. To show that xR i y ′ , consider any Z ∈ P with x ∈ F i Z. Then since F is a partial-stat…
Figure 2.11
Figure 2.11. Figure 2.11: the infinite complete binary tree with outgoing [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_2_11.png]
Figure 2.12
Figure 2.12. Figure 2.12: all of the interplay conditions relating acces [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p031_2_12.png]
Figure 2.13
Figure 2.13. Figure 2.13: the semantic clause for ♦i , without (left) and with (right) the R-down condition. It is useful to know some shortcuts for thinking about sequences of modal operators involving diamonds. Since ♦i1 . . .♦in ϕ is equivalent to ¬i1 . . . in ¬ϕ, we have M, x ♦i1 . . . ♦…
Figure 3.1
Figure 3.1. Figure 3.1: the ⊑-back condition of strict possibility morphisms. Dotted lines indicate the possibility mor￾phism h, while a solid line from s down to t indicates that t is a refinement of s. x h(x) y ′ z ′ F F ′ ⇒ x h(x) y ′ F F ′ y h(y) z ′ ∃ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig…
Figure 3.2
Figure 3.2. Figure 3.2: the R-back condition of strict possibility morphisms. Dashed lines indicate the accessibility relations Ri and R′ i . Note that if R′ i satisfies R-down from § 2.3, then R-back is equivalent to the following simpler condition: if h(x)R′ i y ′ , then ∃y: xRiy and h(y)…
Figure 4.1
Figure 4.1. Figure 4.1: A possibility frame (left) and its separative qu [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p047_4_1.png]
Figure 4.2
Figure 4.2. Figure 4.2: A possibility frame (left) and its tightening (r [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p055_4_2.png]
Figure 4.3
Figure 4.3. Figure 4.3: A non-principal possibility frame. Assume that [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p056_4_3.png]
Figure 4.4
Figure 4.4. Figure 4.4: rich frames (dotted region) shown inside other frame classes from § 4. Each label applies to everything inside the smallest circle (or rectangle) that contains the label. The dashed circle reflects the fact that the distinction between separative and ⊑-tight disappea…
Figure 5.1
Figure 5.1. Figure 5.1: main categories, functors, and categorical rel [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p064_5_1.png]
Figure 5.2
Figure 5.2. Figure 5.2: A possibility frame (left) and one of its selecti [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p096_5_2.png]
Figure 6.1
Figure 6.1. Figure 6.1: diagram for the proof of Proposition 6.23. with u ⊑ t. By R-down, zRβu ′ and u ⊑ u ′ together imply zRβu, and yRγt and u ⊑ t together imply yRγu. But zRβu and yRγu together contradict (32). Thus, u ′ ∈ π(p). Since u ′ was an arbitrary Rβ-successor of z, M, z βp, whic…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

179 extracted references · 78 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Strecker

    Ji r \' i Ad\' a mek, Horst Herrlich, and George E. Strecker. Abstract and Concrete Categories: The Joy of Cats. Dover Publications, Mineloa, NY, 2009. Online at http://katmat.math.uni-bremen.de/acc/acc.pdf

    2009

  2. [2]

    Andr\' e ka and I

    H. Andr\' e ka and I. N\' e meti. HSP K is equational class, without the axiom of choice . Algebra Universalis, 13 0 (1): 0 164--166, 1981

    1981

  3. [3]

    Ultraproducts of continuous posets

    Hajnal Andr\' e ka, Zal\' a n Gyenis, and Istv\' a n N\' e meti. Ultraproducts of continuous posets . Algebra Universalis, 26 0 (2): 0 231--235, 2016

    2016

  4. [4]

    Distributive Lattices

    Raymond Balbes and Philip Dwinger. Distributive Lattices. University of Missouri Press, Columbia, 1974

    1974

  5. [5]

    A Note on Modal Formulae and Relational Properties

    Johan Benthem van Benthem . A Note on Modal Formulae and Relational Properties . The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 40 0 (1): 0 55--58, 1975

    1975

  6. [6]

    Modal Correspondence Theory

    Johan Benthem van Benthem . Modal Correspondence Theory. PhD thesis, University of Amsterdam, 1976 a

    1976

  7. [7]

    Modal Formulas Are Either Elementary or Not -Elementary

    Johan Benthem van Benthem . Modal Formulas Are Either Elementary or Not -Elementary . The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 41 0 (2): 0 436--438, 1976 b

    1976

  8. [8]

    Two simple incomplete modal logics

    Johan Benthem van Benthem . Two simple incomplete modal logics . Theoria, 44 0 (1): 0 25--37, 1978

    1978

Show all 179 references
  1. [9]

    Syntactic aspects of modal incompleteness theorems

    Johan Benthem van Benthem . Syntactic aspects of modal incompleteness theorems . Theoria, 45 0 (2): 0 63--77, 1979 a

    1979

  2. [10]

    Canonical Modal Logics and Ultrafilter Extensions

    Johan Benthem van Benthem . Canonical Modal Logics and Ultrafilter Extensions . The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 44 0 (1): 0 1--8, 1979 b

    1979

  3. [11]

    Possible Worlds Semantics for Classical Logic

    Johan Benthem van Benthem . Possible Worlds Semantics for Classical Logic . Technical Report ZW-8018, Department of Mathematics, Rijksuniversiteit, Groningen, December 1981

    1981

  4. [12]

    Modal Logic and Classical Logic

    Johan Benthem van Benthem . Modal Logic and Classical Logic. Bibliopolis, Milan, 1983

    1983

  5. [13]

    Partiality and Nonmonotonicity in Classical Logic

    Johan Benthem van Benthem . Partiality and Nonmonotonicity in Classical Logic . Logique et Analyse, 29: 0 225--247, 1986

    1986

  6. [14]

    A Manual of Intensional Logic

    Johan Benthem van Benthem . A Manual of Intensional Logic. CSLI Publications, Stanford, 2nd revised and expanded edition, 1988

    1988

  7. [15]

    Correspondence Theory

    Johan Benthem van Benthem . Correspondence Theory . In D.M. Gabbay and F. Guenthner, editors, Handbook of Philosophical Logic, volume 3, pages 325--408. Springer, Dordrecht, 2 edition, 2001

    2001

  8. [16]

    Modal Logic for Open Minds

    Johan Benthem van Benthem . Modal Logic for Open Minds. CSLI Publications, Stanford, 2010

    2010

  9. [17]

    Holliday

    Johan Benthem van Benthem , Nick Bezhanishvili, and Wesley H. Holliday. A bimodal perspective on possibility semantics. Journal of Logic and Computation, 27 0 (5): 0 1353--1389, 2017

    2017

  10. [18]

    E.W. Beth. Semantic construction of intuitionistic logic. Mededelingen der Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen, 19 0 (11): 0 357--388, 1956

    1956

  11. [19]

    Bezhanishvili and W

    G. Bezhanishvili and W. H. Holliday. A semantic hierarchy for intuitionistic logic. Indagationes Mathematicae, 30 0 (3): 0 403--469, 2019. Special issue on ``L.E.J. Brouwer, fifty years later''

    2019

  12. [20]

    Varieties of Monadic Heyting Algebras Part II: Duality Theory

    Guram Bezhanishvili. Varieties of Monadic Heyting Algebras Part II: Duality Theory . Studia Logica, 62 0 (1): 0 21--48, 1999

    1999

  13. [21]

    Holliday

    Guram Bezhanishvili and Wesley H. Holliday. Locales, Nuclei, and Dragalin Frames . In Lev Beklemishev, St\' e phane Demri, and Andr\' a s M\' a t\' e , editors, Advances in Modal Logic, volume 11, pages 177--196. College Publications, London, 2016

    2016

  14. [22]

    Lattices of intermediate and cylindric modal logics

    Nick Bezhanishvili. Lattices of intermediate and cylindric modal logics. PhD thesis, University of Amsterdam, 2006. ILLC Dissertation Series DS-2006-02

    2006

  15. [23]

    On the Structure of Abstract Algebras

    Garrett Birkhoff. On the Structure of Abstract Algebras . Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 31 0 (4): 0 433--454, 1935

    1935

  16. [24]

    Lattice Theory, volume 25 of Colloquium Publications

    Garrett Birkhoff. Lattice Theory, volume 25 of Colloquium Publications. American Mathematical Society, Providence, Rhode Island, 1967

    1967

  17. [25]

    Modal Logic: A Semantic Perspective

    Patrick Blackburn and Johan van Benthem. Modal Logic: A Semantic Perspective . In Patrick Blackburn, Johan van Benthem, and Frank Wolter, editors, Handbook of Modal Logic, pages 1--84. Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2007

    2007

  18. [26]

    Modal Logic

    Patrick Blackburn, Maarten de Rijke, and Yde Venema. Modal Logic. Cambridge University Press, New York, 2001

    2001

  19. [27]

    W. J. Blok. An Axiomatization of the Modal Theory of the Veiled Recession Frame . Studia Logica, 38 0 (1): 0 37--47, 1979

    1979

  20. [28]

    W. J. Blok. The Lattice of Modal Logics: An Algebraic Investigation . The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 45 0 (2): 0 221--236, 1980

    1980

  21. [29]

    Compositionality solves Carnap's problem

    Denis Bonnay and Dag Westerst hl. Compositionality solves Carnap's problem . Manuscript, 2015

    2015

  22. [30]

    An Incomplete Systems of Modal Logic

    George Boolos and Giovanni Sambin. An Incomplete Systems of Modal Logic . Journal of Philosophical Logic, 14 0 (4): 0 351--358, 1985

    1985

  23. [31]

    Models for normal intuitionistic modal logics

    Milan Bo z i\' c and Kosta Do s en. Models for normal intuitionistic modal logics. Studia Logica, 43 0 (3): 0 217--245, 1984

    1984

  24. [32]

    Some Properties Related to Compactness in Topological Spaces

    Donald Carnahan. Some Properties Related to Compactness in Topological Spaces. PhD thesis, University of Arkansas, 1973

    1973

  25. [33]

    A New Semantics for Positive Modal Logic

    Sergio Celani and Ramon Jansana. A New Semantics for Positive Modal Logic . Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, 38 0 (1): 0 1--19, 1997

    1997

  26. [34]

    A Closer Look at Some Subintuitionistic Logics

    Sergio Celani and Ramon Jansana. A Closer Look at Some Subintuitionistic Logics . Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, 42 0 (4): 0 225--255, 2001

    2001

  27. [35]

    Modal Logic

    Alexander Chagrov and Michael Zakharyaschev. Modal Logic. Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1997

    1997

  28. [36]

    C. C. Chang and H. Jerome Keisler. Model Theory . Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics. North-Holland Press, New York, 3rd edition, 1990

    1990

  29. [37]

    Brian F. Chellas. Modal logic: an introduction. Cambridge University Press, New York, 1980

    1980

  30. [38]

    Modalities in the Realm of Questions: Axiomatizing Inquisitive Epistemic Logic

    Ivano Ciardelli. Modalities in the Realm of Questions: Axiomatizing Inquisitive Epistemic Logic . In Rajeev Gor\' e , Barteld Kooi, and Agi Kurucz, editors, Advances in Modal Logic, volume 10, pages 94--113. College Publications, London, 2014

    2014

  31. [39]

    Inquisitive Logic

    Ivano Ciardelli and Floris Roelofsen. Inquisitive Logic . Journal of Philosophical Logic, 40: 0 55--94, 2011

    2011

  32. [40]

    Inquisitive dynamic epistemic logic

    Ivano Ciardelli and Floris Roelofsen. Inquisitive dynamic epistemic logic . Synthese, 192 0 (6): 0 1643--1687, 2015

    2015

  33. [41]

    Inquisitive Semantics: A New Notion of Meaning

    Ivano Ciardelli, Jeroen Groenendijk, and Floris Roelofsen. Inquisitive Semantics: A New Notion of Meaning . Language and Linguistics Compass, 7 0 (9): 0 459--476, 2013

    2013

  34. [42]

    On the semantics and logic of declaratives and interrogatives

    Ivano Ciardelli, Jeroen Groenendijk, and Floris Roelofsen. On the semantics and logic of declaratives and interrogatives . Synthese, 192 0 (6): 0 1689--1728, 2015

    2015

  35. [43]

    Ciardelli

    Ivano A. Ciardelli. Inquisitive semantics and intermediate logics. Master's thesis, University of Amsterdam, 2009. ILLC Master of Logic Thesis Series MoL-2009-11

    2009

  36. [44]

    Ciardelli

    Ivano A. Ciardelli. Questions in Logic. PhD thesis, University of Amsterdam, 2016

    2016

  37. [45]

    Paul J. Cohen. Set Theory and the Continuum Hypothesis. W. A. Benjamin, New York, 1966

    1966

  38. [46]

    Constructive Canonicity of Inductive Inequalities

    Willem Conradie and Alessandra Palmigiano. Constructive Canonicity of Inductive Inequalities . arXiv:1603.08341 [math.LO], 2016

    2016 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Algebraic modal correspondence: Sahlqvist and beyond

    Willem Conradie, Alessandra Palmigiano, and Sumit Sourabh. Algebraic modal correspondence: Sahlqvist and beyond . Journal of Logical and Algebraic Methods in Programming, 91: 0 60--84, 2017

    2017

  40. [48]

    Cresswell

    M.J. Cresswell. Possibility Semantics for Intuitionistic Logic . Australasian Journal of Logic, 2: 0 11--29, 2004

    2004

  41. [49]

    Davey and H.A

    B.A. Davey and H.A. Priestley. Introduction to Lattices and Order. Cambridge University Press, New York, 2nd edition, 2002

    2002

  42. [50]

    Duality Between Modal Algebras and Neighborhood Frames

    Kosta Do s en. Duality Between Modal Algebras and Neighborhood Frames . Studia Logica, 48 0 (2): 0 219--234, 1989

    1989

  43. [51]

    A. G. Dragalin. Mathematical Intuitionism: Introduction to Proof Theory. Translations of Mathematical Monographs. American Mathematical Society, Providence, Rhode Island, 1988

    1988

  44. [52]

    Michael Dunn, Mai Gehrke, and Alessandra Palmigiano

    J. Michael Dunn, Mai Gehrke, and Alessandra Palmigiano. Canonical Extensions and Relational Completeness of Some Substructural Logics . The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 70 0 (3): 0 713--740, 2005

    2005

  45. [53]

    The Paradox of Knowability

    Dorothy Edgington. The Paradox of Knowability . Mind, 94 0 (376): 0 557--568, 1985

    1985

  46. [54]

    Possible knowledge of unknown truth

    Dorothy Edgington. Possible knowledge of unknown truth . Synthese, 173: 0 41--52, 2010

    2010

  47. [55]

    Topological Kripke Models

    Leo Esakia. Topological Kripke Models . Soviet Mathematics Doklady, 15 0 (1): 0 147--151, 1974

    1974

  48. [56]

    Propositional Lax Logic

    Matt Fairtlough and Michael Mendler. Propositional Lax Logic . Information and Computation, 137 0 (1): 0 1--33, 1997

    1997

  49. [57]

    Feferman

    S. Feferman. Some applications of the notions of forcing and generic sets. Fundamenta Mathematicae, 56 0 (3): 0 325--345, 1964

    1964

  50. [58]

    Models for Entailment

    Kit Fine. Models for Entailment . Journal of Philosophical Logic, 3 0 (4): 0 347--372, 1974 a

    1974

  51. [59]

    An incomplete logic containing S4

    Kit Fine. An incomplete logic containing S4 . Theoria, 60: 0 23--29, 1974 b

    1974

  52. [60]

    Vagueness, Truth and Logic

    Kit Fine. Vagueness, Truth and Logic . Synthese, 30 0 (3-4): 0 265--300, 1975 a

    1975

  53. [61]

    Some Connections Between Elementary and Modal Logic

    Kit Fine. Some Connections Between Elementary and Modal Logic . In Stig Kanger, editor, Proceedings of the Third Scandinavian Logic Symposium, pages 15--31. North Holland, Amsterdam, 1975 b

    1975

  54. [62]

    An Observation Concerning Porte's Rule in Modal Logic

    Rohan French and Lloyd Humberstone. An Observation Concerning Porte's Rule in Modal Logic . Bulletin of the Section of Logic, 44 0 (1/2): 0 25--31, 2015

    2015

  55. [63]

    Pseudo-complements in semi-lattices

    Orrin Frink. Pseudo-complements in semi-lattices. Duke Mathematical Journal, 29 0 (4): 0 505--514, 1962

    1962

  56. [64]

    Modal logic

    James Garson. Modal logic. In Edward N. Zalta, editor, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Summer 2014 edition, 2014

    2014

  57. [65]

    James W. Garson. What Logics Mean: From Proof Theory to Model-Theoretic Semantics . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2013

    2013

  58. [66]

    Bounded Lattice Expansions

    Mai Gehrke and John Harding. Bounded Lattice Expansions . Journal of Algebra, 238 0 (1): 0 345--371, 2001

    2001

  59. [67]

    Priestley

    Mai Gehrke and Hilary A. Priestley. Canonical Extensions and Completions of Posets and Lattices . Reports on Mathematical Logic, 43: 0 133--152, 2008

    2008

  60. [68]

    MacNeille Completions and Canonical Extensions

    Mai Gehrke, John Harding, and Yde Venema. MacNeille Completions and Canonical Extensions . Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 358 0 (2): 0 573--590, 2005

    2005

  61. [69]

    U ber das Verh\

    Gerhard Gentzen. \" U ber das Verh\" a ltnis zwischen intuitionistischer und klassischer Arithmetik . Mathematische Annalen, 1933

    1933

  62. [70]

    Die Widerspruchsfreiheit der reinen Zahlentheorie

    Gerhard Gentzen. Die Widerspruchsfreiheit der reinen Zahlentheorie . Mathematische Annalen, 112: 0 493--565, 1936

    1936

  63. [71]

    U ber das Verh\

    Gerhard Gentzen. \" U ber das Verh\" a ltnis zwischen intuitionistischer und klassischer Arithmetik . Archiv f\" u r mathematische Logik und Grundlagenforschung , 16 0 (3): 0 119--132, 1974

    1974

  64. [72]

    An algebraic theory of normal forms

    Silvio Ghilardi. An algebraic theory of normal forms . Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, 71: 0 189--245, 1995

    1995

  65. [73]

    Constructive canonicity in non-classical logics

    Silvio Ghilardi and Giancarlo Meloni. Constructive canonicity in non-classical logics . Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, 86 0 (1): 0 1--32, 1997

    1997

  66. [74]

    Givant and Y

    S. Givant and Y. Venema. The preservation of Sahlqvist equations in completions of Boolean algebras with operators . Algebra Universalis, 41 0 (1): 0 47--84, 1999

    1999

  67. [75]

    Duality Theories for Boolean Algebras with Operators

    Steven Givant. Duality Theories for Boolean Algebras with Operators . Springer, New York, 2014

    2014

  68. [76]

    Introduction to Boolean Algebras

    Steven Givant and Paul Halmos. Introduction to Boolean Algebras . Springer, New York, 2000

    2000

  69. [77]

    Sur quelques points de la logique de M

    Val\` e re Glivenko. Sur quelques points de la logique de M. Brouwe . Bull. Acad. des Sci. de Belgique, 15: 0 183--188, 1929

    1929

  70. [78]

    Zur intuitionistischen arithmetik und zahlentheorie

    Kurt G\" o del. Zur intuitionistischen arithmetik und zahlentheorie. Ergebnisse eines Mathematischen Kolloquiums, 4: 0 34--38, 1933

    1933

  71. [79]

    R. I. Goldblatt. First-Order Definability in Modal Logic . The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 40 0 (1): 0 35--40, 1975

    1975

  72. [80]

    R. I. Goldblatt. Metamathematics of Modal Logic, Part I . Reports on Mathematical Logic, 6: 0 41--78, 1976 a

    1976

  73. [81]

    R. I. Goldblatt. Metamathematics of Modal Logic, Part II . Reports on Mathematical Logic, 7: 0 21--52, 1976 b

    1976

  74. [82]

    R. I. Goldblatt and S. K. Thomason. Axiomatic Classes in Propositional Modal Logic . In John N. Crossley, editor, Algebra and Logic, volume 450 of Lecture Notes in Mathematics, pages 163--173. Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, 1975

    1975

  75. [83]

    Metamathematics of Modal Logic

    Robert Goldblatt. Metamathematics of Modal Logic. PhD thesis, Victoria University, Wellington, 1974. Reprinted in Goldblatt 1993

    1974

  76. [84]

    Mathematics of Modality

    Robert Goldblatt. Mathematics of Modality. CSLI Publications, Stanford, CA, 1993

    1993

  77. [85]

    Mathematical Modal Logic: A View of Its Evolution

    Robert Goldblatt. Mathematical Modal Logic: A View of Its Evolution . In Dov M. Gabbay and John Woods, editors, Handbook of the History of Logic, volume 7, pages 1--98. Elsevier, 2006 a

    2006

  78. [86]

    Maps and Monads for Modal Frames

    Robert Goldblatt. Maps and Monads for Modal Frames . Studia Logica, 83 0 (1): 0 309--331, 2006 b

    2006

  79. [87]

    Goldblatt

    Robert I. Goldblatt. Grothendieck Topology as Geometric Modality . Zeitschrift f\" u r mathematische Logik und Grundlagen der Mathematik , 27: 0 495--529, 1981

    1981

  80. [88]

    Model Theory of Modal Logic

    Valentin Goranko and Martin Otto. Model Theory of Modal Logic . In Patrick Blackburn, Johan van Benthem, and Frank Wolter, editors, Handbook of Modal Logic, pages 249--329. Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2007

    2007

  81. [89]

    Halpern and Azriel L\' e vy

    James D. Halpern and Azriel L\' e vy. The Boolean Prime Ideal Theorem Does Not Imply the Axiom of Choice . In Dana S. Scott, editor, Axiomatic Set Theory, volume 13 of Proceedings of Symposia in Pure Mathematics, pages 83--134. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1971

    1971

  82. [90]

    MacNeille Completions of Modal Algebras

    John Harding and Guram Bezhanishvili. MacNeille Completions of Modal Algebras . Houston Journal of Mathematics, 33 0 (2): 0 355--384, 2007

    2007

  83. [91]

    A Representation Theorem for Possibility Models

    Matthew Harrison-Trainor. A Representation Theorem for Possibility Models . UC Berkeley Working Paper in Logic and the Methodology of Science, 2017. URL https://escholarship.org/uc/item/881757qn

    2017

  84. [92]

    First-Order Possibility Models and Finitary Completeness Proofs

    Matthew Harrison-Trainor. First-Order Possibility Models and Finitary Completeness Proofs . The Review of Symbolic Logic, 12 0 (4): 0 637--662, 2019

    2019

  85. [93]

    The Expressive Power of Modal Dependence Logic

    Lauri Hella, Kerkko Luosto, Katsuhiko Sano, and Jonni Virtema. The Expressive Power of Modal Dependence Logic . In Rajeev Gor\' e , Barteld Kooi, and Agi Kurucz, editors, Advances in Modal Logic, volume 10, pages 294--312. College Publications, London, 2014

    2014

  86. [94]

    Holliday

    Wesley H. Holliday. Partiality and Adjointness in Modal Logic . In Rajeev Gor\' e , Barteld Kooi, and Agi Kurucz, editors, Advances in Modal Logic, volume 10, pages 313--332. College Publications, London, 2014

    2014

  87. [95]

    Holliday

    Wesley H. Holliday. Possibility Frames and Forcing for Modal Logic . UC Berkeley Working Paper in Logic and the Methodology of Science , 2015. URL https://escholarship.org/uc/item/5462j5b6

    2015

  88. [96]

    Holliday

    Wesley H. Holliday. Possibility Frames and Forcing for Modal Logic (June 2016) . UC Berkeley Working Paper in Logic and the Methodology of Science , 2016. URL https://escholarship.org/uc/item/9v11r0dq

    2016

  89. [97]

    Holliday

    Wesley H. Holliday. Possibility Frames and Forcing for Modal Logic (February 2018) . UC Berkeley Working Paper in Logic and the Methodology of Science , 2018. URL https://escholarship.org/uc/item/0tm6b30q

    2018

  90. [98]

    Holliday

    Wesley H. Holliday. Possibility semantics. In Melvin Fitting, editor, Selected Topics from Contemporary Logics, volume 2 of Landscapes in Logic, pages 363--476. College Publications, 2021. URL https://escholarship.org/uc/item/9ts1b228

    2021

  91. [99]

    Holliday

    Wesley H. Holliday. Compatibility and accessibility: lattice representations for semantics of non-classical and modal logics. In David Fern\' a ndez Duque, Alessandra Palmigiano, and Sophie Pinchinat, editors, Advances in Modal Logic, Vol. 14, pages 507--529. College Publicati...

    2022 arXiv

  92. [100]

    Holliday

    Wesley H. Holliday. A fundamental non-classical logic. Logics, 1: 0 36--79, 2023

    2023

  93. [101]

    Holliday

    Wesley H. Holliday. Modal logic, fundamentally. In Agata Ciabattoni, David Gabelaia, and Igor Sedlár, editors, Advances in Modal Logic, Vol. 15, pages 423--446. College Publications, London, 2024. arXiv:2403.14043 [math.LO]

    2024 arXiv

  94. [102]

    Holliday and Tadeusz Litak

    Wesley H. Holliday and Tadeusz Litak. Complete additivity and modal incompleteness. The Review of Symbolic Logic, 12 0 (3): 0 487--535, 2019

    2019

  95. [103]

    Holliday and Matthew Mandelkern

    Wesley H. Holliday and Matthew Mandelkern. The orthologic of epistemic modals. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 53: 0 831--907, 2024. doi:10.1007/s10992-024-09746-7. arXiv:2203.02872 [cs.LO]

    2024 arXiv

  96. [104]

    Hughes and M.J

    G.E. Hughes and M.J. Cresswell. A New Introduction to Modal Logic. Routledge, New York, 1996

    1996

  97. [105]

    From Worlds to Possibilities

    Lloyd Humberstone. From Worlds to Possibilities . Journal of Philosophical Logic, 10 0 (3): 0 313--339, 1981

    1981

  98. [106]

    Heterogeneous Logic

    Lloyd Humberstone. Heterogeneous Logic . Erkenntnis, 10 0 (3): 0 395--435, 1988

    1988

  99. [107]

    The Connectives

    Lloyd Humberstone. The Connectives . MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., 2011

    2011

  100. [108]

    Supervenience, dependence, disjunction

    Lloyd Humberstone. Supervenience, dependence, disjunction. Logic and Logical Philosophy, 28: 0 3--135, 2019

    2019

  101. [109]

    Multiple Forcing

    Thomas Jech. Multiple Forcing. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1986

    1986

  102. [110]

    Thomas J. Jech. Set Theory. Springer, New York, 3rd edition, 2002

    2002

  103. [111]

    Thomas J. Jech. The Axiom of Choice. Dover, Mineola, New York, 2008

    2008

  104. [112]

    A Survey of Boolean Algebras with Operators

    Bjarni J\' o nnson. A Survey of Boolean Algebras with Operators . In I. G. Rosenberg and G. Sabidussi, editors, Algebras and Orders, pages 239--286. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1993

    1993

  105. [113]

    Boolean Algebras with Operators

    Bjarni J\' o nsson and Alfred Tarski. Boolean Algebras with Operators. Part I. American Journal of Mathematics, 73: 0 891--939, 1951

    1951

  106. [114]

    Boolean Algebras with Operators

    Bjarni J\' o nsson and Alfred Tarski. Boolean Algebras with Operators. Part II. American Journal of Mathematics, 74: 0 127--162, 1952

    1952

  107. [115]

    Brouwerian semilattices

    Peter K\" o hler. Brouwerian semilattices. Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 268 0 (1): 0 103--126, 1981

    1981

  108. [116]

    Semantical study of intuitionistic modal logics

    Kensuke Kojima. Semantical study of intuitionistic modal logics. PhD thesis, Kyoto University, 2012

    2012

  109. [117]

    Modal Independence Logic

    Juha Kontinen, Julian-Steffen M\" u ller, Henning Schnoor, and Heribert Vollmer. Modal Independence Logic . In Rajeev Gor\' e , Barteld Kooi, and Agi Kurucz, editors, Advances in Modal Logic, pages 353--372. College Publications, London, 2014

    2014

  110. [118]

    How Completeness and Correspondence Theory Got Married

    Marcus Kracht. How Completeness and Correspondence Theory Got Married . In M. de Rijke, editor, Diamonds and Defaults, pages 175--214. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 1993

    1993

  111. [119]

    Tools and Techniques in Modal Logic

    Marcus Kracht. Tools and Techniques in Modal Logic. Elsevier, 1999

    1999

  112. [120]

    Simulation and Transfer Results in Modal Logic - A Survey

    Marcus Kracht and Frank Wolter. Simulation and Transfer Results in Modal Logic - A Survey . Studia Logica, 59: 0 149--177, 1997

    1997

  113. [121]

    Normal Monomodal Logics Can Simulate All Others

    Marcus Kracht and Frank Wolter. Normal Monomodal Logics Can Simulate All Others . Journal of Symbolic Logic, 64 0 (1): 0 99--138, 1999

    1999

  114. [122]

    Dynamic topological logic

    Philip Kremer and Grigori Mints. Dynamic topological logic. Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, 131: 0 133--158, 2005

    2005

  115. [123]

    Saul A. Kripke. Semantical Analysis of Modal Logic I. Normal Modal Propositional Calculi . Zeitschrift f\" u r Mathematische Logik und Grundlagen der Mathematik , 9: 0 67--96, 1963

    1963

  116. [124]

    Saul A. Kripke. Semantical Analysis of Intuitionistic Logic I . In J.N. Crossley and M.A.E. Dummett, editors, Formal Systems and Recursive Functions, pages 92--130. North-Holland Publishing Company, Amsterdam, 1965

    1965

  117. [125]

    Lemmon and Dana Scott

    E.J. Lemmon and Dana Scott. The ``Lemmon Notes'': An Introduction to Modal Logic. Number 11 in American Philosophical Quarterly Monograph Series. Basil Blackwell, Oxford, 1977

    1977

  118. [126]

    On Notions of Completeness Weaker than Kripke Completeness

    Tadeusz Litak. On Notions of Completeness Weaker than Kripke Completeness . In Renate Schmidt, Ian Pratt-Hartmann, Mark Reynolds, and Heinrich Wansing, editors, Advances in Modal Logic, volume 5, pages 149--169. College Publications, London, 2005 a

    2005

  119. [127]

    An Algebraic Approach to Incompleteness in Modal Logic

    Tadeusz Litak. An Algebraic Approach to Incompleteness in Modal Logic. PhD thesis, Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, 2005 b

    2005

  120. [128]

    Stability of the Blok Theorem

    Tadeusz Litak. Stability of the Blok Theorem . Algebra Universalis, 58 0 (4): 0 385--411, 2008

    2008

  121. [129]

    H. M. MacNeille. Partially Ordered Sets . Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 42: 0 416--460, 1937

    1937

  122. [130]

    A Normal Modal Calculus Between T and S4 without the Finite Model Property

    David Makinson. A Normal Modal Calculus Between T and S4 without the Finite Model Property . The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 34 0 (1): 0 35--38, 1969

    1969

  123. [131]

    A generalisation of the concept of a relational model for modal logic

    David Makinson. A generalisation of the concept of a relational model for modal logic . Theoria, 36: 0 330--335, 1970

    1970

  124. [132]

    Some Embedding Theorems for Modal Logic

    David Makinson. Some Embedding Theorems for Modal Logic . Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, 12 0 (2): 0 252--254, 1971

    1971

  125. [133]

    B-frame duality

    Guillaume Massas. B-frame duality . Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, 174 0 (5): 0 103245, 2023

    2023

  126. [134]

    Yu. T. Medvedev. Interpretation of the Logical Formulas by Means of Finite Problems . Soviet Mathematics Doklady, 7 0 (1): 0 857--860, 1966

    1966

  127. [135]

    Kripke Incomplete Logics Containing KTB

    Yutaka Miyazaki. Kripke Incomplete Logics Containing KTB . Studia Logica, 85: 0 303--317, 2007

    2007

  128. [136]

    Donald Monk

    J. Donald Monk. Completions of Boolean Algberas with Operators . Mathematische Nachrichten, 46: 0 47--55, 1970

    1970

  129. [137]

    Universal Grammar

    Richard Montague. Universal Grammar . Theoria, 36 0 (3): 0 373--398, 1970

    1970

  130. [138]

    Gregory H. Moore. The Origins of Forcing . In Frank R. Drake and John K. Truss, editors, Logic Colloquium '86, pages 143--173. North Holland, Amsterdam, 1988

    1988

  131. [139]

    William C. Nemitz. Implicative Semi-Lattices . Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 117: 0 128--142, 1965

    1965

  132. [140]

    Adding dependent choice to the prime ideal theorem

    David Pincus. Adding dependent choice to the prime ideal theorem. In R. O. Gandy and J. M. E. Hyland, editors, Logic Colloquium 76, volume 87 of Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics, pages 547--565. North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1977

    1977

  133. [141]

    David Pincus and Robert M. Solovay. Definability of measures and ultrafilters. The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 42 0 (2): 0 179--190, 1977

    1977

  134. [142]

    First Steps in Modal Logic

    Sally Popkorn. First Steps in Modal Logic. Cambridge University Press, New York, 1994

    1994

  135. [143]

    A new semantic framework for Modal Logic

    V\' i t Pun c och\' a r . A new semantic framework for Modal Logic . Philosophical Alternatives, 23 0 (6): 0 47--59, 2014

    2014

  136. [144]

    A Generalization of Inquisitive Semantics

    V\' i t Pun c och\' a r . A Generalization of Inquisitive Semantics . Journal of Philosophical Logic, 45: 0 399--428, 2016

    2016

  137. [145]

    Algebras of Information States

    V\' i t Pun c och\' a r . Algebras of Information States . Journal of Logic and Computation, 27 0 (5): 0 1643--1675, 2017

    2017

  138. [146]

    Subintuitionistic Logics

    Greg Restall. Subintuitionistic Logics . Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, 35 0 (1): 0 116--129, 1994

    1994

  139. [147]

    An Introduction to Substructural Logics

    Greg Restall. An Introduction to Substructural Logics. Routledge, New York, 2000

    2000

  140. [148]

    Intuitionistic Correspondence Theory

    Piet Rodenburg. Intuitionistic Correspondence Theory. PhD thesis, University of Amsterdam, 1986

    1986

  141. [149]

    Algebraic foundations for the semantic treatment of inquisitive content

    Floris Roelofsen. Algebraic foundations for the semantic treatment of inquisitive content . Synthese, 190: 0 79--102, 2013

    2013

  142. [150]

    On A Neglected Path to Intuitionism

    Ian Rumfitt. On A Neglected Path to Intuitionism . Topoi, 31: 0 101--109, 2012

    2012

  143. [151]

    The Boundary Stones of Thought: An Essay in the Philosophy of Logic

    Ian Rumfitt. The Boundary Stones of Thought: An Essay in the Philosophy of Logic. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2015

    2015

  144. [152]

    Completeness and Correspondence in the First and Second Order Semantics for Modal Logic

    Henrik Sahlqvist. Completeness and Correspondence in the First and Second Order Semantics for Modal Logic . In Stig Kanger, editor, Proceedings of the Third Scandinavian Logic Symposium, pages 110--143. North Holland, Amsterdam, 1975

    1975

  145. [153]

    Topology and Duality in Modal Logic

    Giovanni Sambin and Virginia Vaccaro. Topology and Duality in Modal Logic . Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, 37: 0 249--296, 1988

    1988

  146. [154]

    Advice on modal logic

    Dana Scott. Advice on modal logic. In Karel Lambert, editor, Philosophical Problems in Logic: Some Recent Developments, volume 29, pages 143--173. D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, 1970

    1970

  147. [155]

    An Essay in Classical Modal Logic, volume 3 of Filosofiska Studier

    Krister Segerberg. An Essay in Classical Modal Logic, volume 3 of Filosofiska Studier. Uppsala Universitet, Uppsala, 1971

    1971

  148. [156]

    On the intermediate logic of open subsets of metric spaces

    Timofei Shatrov. On the intermediate logic of open subsets of metric spaces. In Carlos Areces and Robert Goldblatt, editors, Advances in Modal Logic, volume 7, pages 305--313. College Publications, London, 2008

    2008

  149. [157]

    Skvortsov

    D. Skvortsov. The Logic of Infinite Problems and the Kripke Models on Atomic Semilattices of Sets . Doklady Akademii Nauk SSSR, 245 0 (4): 0 798--801, 1979. Russian

    1979

  150. [158]

    M. H. Stone. The Theory of Representation for Boolean Algebras . Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 40 0 (1): 0 37--111, 1936

    1936

  151. [159]

    M. H. Stone. Applications of the Theory of Boolean Rings to General Topology . Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 41 0 (3): 0 375--481, 1937

    1937

  152. [160]

    Gaisi Takeuti and Wilson M. Zaring. Axiomatic Set Theory . Springer-Verlag, New York, 1973

    1973

  153. [161]

    U ber additive und multiplikative Mengenk\

    Alfred Tarski. \" U ber additive und multiplikative Mengenk\" o rper und Mengenfunktionen . Sprawozdania z Posiedze\' n Towarzystwa Naukowego Warszawskiego, Wydzia III, Nauk Matematyczno-fizycznych , 30: 0 151--181, 1937 a

    1937

  154. [162]

    Ideale in den Mengenk\" o rpen

    Alfred Tarski. Ideale in den Mengenk\" o rpen . Annales de la Soci\' e t\' e Polonaise de Math\' e matique , 15: 0 186--189, 1937 b

    1937

  155. [163]

    Der A ussagenkalku\" u l und die T opologie

    Alfred Tarski. Der A ussagenkalku\" u l und die T opologie. Fundamenta Mathematicae, 31 0 (1): 0 103--134, 1938. English translation as Chapter 17 of Tarski1956

    1938

  156. [164]

    Logic, Semantics, Metamathematics: Papers from 1923 to 1938

    Alfred Tarski. Logic, Semantics, Metamathematics: Papers from 1923 to 1938. Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1956. Translated by J. H. Woodger

    1923

  157. [165]

    The Importance of Being Discrete

    Balder ten Cate and Tadeusz Litak. The Importance of Being Discrete . Technical Report PP-2007-39, Institute for Logic, Language and Computation, University of Amsterdam, 2007

    2007

  158. [166]

    MacNeille completions of lattice expansions

    Mark Theunissen and Yde Venema. MacNeille completions of lattice expansions . Algebra Universalis, 57 0 (2): 0 143--193, 2007

    2007

  159. [167]

    S. K. Thomason. Semantic Analysis of Tense Logics . The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 37 0 (1): 0 150--158, 1972

    1972

  160. [168]

    S. K. Thomason. An incompleteness theorem in modal logic . Theoria, 40 0 (1): 0 30--34, 1974 a

    1974

  161. [169]

    S. K. Thomason. Reduction of Tense Logic to Modal Logic I . The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 39 0 (3): 0 549--551, 1974 b

    1974

  162. [170]

    S. K. Thomason. Categories of Frames for Modal Logic . The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 40 0 (3): 0 439--442, 1975 a

    1975

  163. [171]

    S. K. Thomason. Reduction of Tense Logic to Modal Logic II . Theoria, 41 0 (3): 0 154--169, 1975 b

    1975

  164. [172]

    S. K. Thomason. Reduction of Second-Order Logic to Modal Logic . Zeitschrift f\" u r mathematische Logik und Grundlagen der Mathematik , 21 0 (1): 0 107--114, 1975 c

    1975

  165. [173]

    a \" a n\

    Jouko V\" a \" a n\" a nen. Modal Dependence Logic . In Krzysztof R. Apt and Robert van Rooij, editors, New Perspectives on Games and Interaction, volume 4 of Texts in Logic and Games, pages 237--254. Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam, 2008

    2008

  166. [174]

    Atom Structures

    Yde Venema. Atom Structures . In Marcus Kracht, Maarten de Rijke, Heinrich Wansing, and Michael Zakharyaschev, editors, Advances in Modal Logic, volume 1, pages 291--305. CSLI Publications, Stanford, CA, 1998

    1998

  167. [175]

    Atomless Varieties

    Yde Venema. Atomless Varieties . The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 68 0 (2): 0 607--614, 2003

    2003

  168. [176]

    Algebras and Coalgebras

    Yde Venema. Algebras and Coalgebras . In Patrick Blackburn, Johan van Benthem, and Frank Wolter, editors, Handbook of Modal Logic, pages 331--426. Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2007

    2007

  169. [177]

    The relation between intuitionistic and classical modal logics

    Frank Wolter and Michael Zakharyaschev. The relation between intuitionistic and classical modal logics . Algebra and Logic, 36 0 (2): 0 73--92, 1997

    1997

  170. [178]

    Intuitionistic Modal Logics as Fragments of Classical Bimodal Logics

    Frank Wolter and Michael Zakharyaschev. Intuitionistic Modal Logics as Fragments of Classical Bimodal Logics . In Ewa Orłowska, editor, Logic at Work: Essays Dedicated to the Memory of Helena Rasiowa, pages 168--183. Physica Verlag, Heidelberg, 1999

    1999

  171. [179]

    Results in modal correspondence theory for possibility semantics

    Kentar\^ o Yamamoto. Results in modal correspondence theory for possibility semantics . Journal of Logic and Computation, 27 0 (8): 0 2411--2430, 2017. URL https://escholarship.org/uc/item/7t12914n

    2017

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.