No description available.

The purpose of this work is to investigate how processes of inference are reflected in the grammar of the natural language. I consider a range of phenomena which call for a representational theory of mind and thought. These constructions display a certain regularity in their truth conditions, but the regularity does not extend to closure under arbitrary logical entailment. I develop a logic that allows me to speak formally about classes of inferences. This logic is then applied to analysis of indirect speech, belief reports, evidentials (with special attention to Bulgarian) and clarity assertions. / text

No description available.

A disjunction is an expression using ‘or’, such as ‘Anne has a Ford or a Tesla’. From such a statement, we cannot usually infer either disjunct, for example, that ‘Anne has a Ford’. However, in choice situations like ‘You may have coffee or tea’ we can infer either option. The problem of free choice disjunction is to determine why these choice inferences are legitimate (von Wright 1968, Kamp 1973, Meyer 2016). Central to this discussion is the observation that a modal possibility operator ranging over a disjunction sometimes implies a conjunction of possibilities. In the case of permission, we express this as the choice principle ‘May (P or Q)’ entails ‘May P and May Q’ (Zimmerman 2000). Unfortunately, this inference cannot hold in a logical language without significant modification of the systems involved. I explore the history of proposed solutions to this problem, including semantic solutions that assign a distinctive meaning to free choice disjunctions and pragmatic solutions that use features of their utterance to solve the problem. I draw connections between semantics and pragmatics and, using the tools of dynamic logic (Baltag et al. 1998, van Benthem 2010), I present a formal account of one major (Gricean) approach to the problem (Kratzer & Shimoyama 2002). Ultimately, I explore the role of logic in this debate and argue that we should formally represent the meaning of these expressions directly as conjunctions of possibilities. Thus, rather than trying to account for the choice principle within a logical system, we must instead account for the fact that, in choice situations, the meaning of ‘May (P or Q)’ translates into logical formalism as (May P & May Q). / Thesis / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) / A disjunction is a statement using ‘or’, like ‘Anne has a Ford or a Tesla’. From such a statement, we cannot infer either disjunct—e.g. ‘Anne has a Ford’. In choice situations like ‘You may have coffee or tea’ we can infer either option. Why this choice inference is legitimate is the problem of free choice disjunction. I explore the history of solutions to the problem, including semantic solutions that propose a special meaning to choice disjunctions and pragmatic solutions that appeal to the circumstances in which they are uttered. I draw connections between semantics and pragmatics and present a formal account of one major pragmatic approach to the problem. Where others have sought to explain how 'May(P or Q)' entails 'May P and May Q', I argue instead that the meaning of ‘May (P or Q)’ in choice scenarios translates directly into logical formalism as ‘May P & May Q’.

Dans cette thèse, nous proposons des modèles logiques pour la représentation des croyances et leur changement dans un cadre multi-agent, en insistant sur l'importance de se fixer un point de vue particulier pour la modélisation. A cet égard, nous distinguons deux approches différentes: l'approche externe, où le modélisateur est quelqu'un d'externe à la situation; l'approche interne, où le modélisateur est l'un des agents. Nous proposons une version interne de la logique épistémique dynamique (avec des modèles d'événements), ce qui nous permet de généraliser facilement la théorie de la révision des croyances d'AGM au cas multi-agent. Ensuite, nous mod´elisons les dynamismes logiques complexes qui soustendent notre interprétation des événements en introduisant des probabilités et des infinitésimaux. Finalement, nous proposons un formalisme alternatif qui n'utilise pas de modèle d'événement mais qui introduit à la place un opérateur d'événement inverse.

Submitted by Franciele Moreira (francielemoreyra@gmail.com) on 2018-02-15T15:02:41Z No. of bitstreams: 2 Dissertação - Thiago de Almeida Bastos -2018 .pdf: 2834099 bytes, checksum: 20704146dd6e29dc70c067fcbd0011a2 (MD5) license_rdf: 0 bytes, checksum: d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Luciana Ferreira (lucgeral@gmail.com) on 2018-02-16T09:38:12Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 2 Dissertação - Thiago de Almeida Bastos -2018 .pdf: 2834099 bytes, checksum: 20704146dd6e29dc70c067fcbd0011a2 (MD5) license_rdf: 0 bytes, checksum: d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2018-02-16T09:38:12Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 2 Dissertação - Thiago de Almeida Bastos -2018 .pdf: 2834099 bytes, checksum: 20704146dd6e29dc70c067fcbd0011a2 (MD5) license_rdf: 0 bytes, checksum: d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e (MD5) Previous issue date: 2018-01-30 / This master's thesis seeks to contribute to the automation of production lines, and proposes a methodology for the formal verification of flexible manufacturing models by the Petri-PDL tool. The Petri-PDL framework is based on a multimodal logic associated with a scheme defined for the problem with the Petri nets to specify and model sequential problems demonstrating in logical proofs the correctness of properties inferred by the model. This formal treatment is adapted for the treatment of flexible sequential processes, since these models are used in many other applications with Petri nets. They will be considered models of flexible production system found in the systematic review to evaluate the efficiency of its model and its adaptation to this formal refinement. / Este trabalho busca contribuir com a automação de linhas de produção e propõe uma metodologia para a verificação formal de modelos de manufatura flexível a partir da ferramenta Petri-PDL. O conceito Petri-PDL baseia-se em uma lógica multimodal associada ao esquema definido para o problema com as redes de Petri para especificar e modelar problemas sequenciais demonstrando em provas lógicas a corretude de propriedades inferidas pelo modelo. Este tratamento formal será adaptado para o tratamento de processos sequenciais flexíveis, uma vez que estes modelos são usados em muitas outras aplicações com redes de Petri. Serão considerados modelos de sistema de produção flexível encontrados na revisão sistemática para avaliar a eficiência de seu modelo e sua adaptação a este refinamento formal.

One way of modeling workflows in business process management (BPM) is by using a declarative approach, that is, instead of imperatively specifying what needs to be done, and in what order, one can specify constraints on what is allowed. The result is a more flexible model as everything that does not violate the specified constraints is allowed. In recent years, Linear Temporal Logic on finite traces (LTLf) has been one of the available logics used to specify such constraints. However, LTLf lacks the ability to monitor metaconstraints (i.e., constraints overconstraints). To handle this, one can use Linear Dynamic Logic on finite traces (LDLf) instead. In their paper Monitoring Constraints and Metaconstraints withTemporal Logics on Finite Traces, De Giacomo et al. (2020) presented a framework, and a formal way of translating LDLf formula to an executable Deterministic Finite Automaton (DFA), to be used in BPM. The algorithm they used for the translation was LDLf2NFA. This paper investigates if the construction time, and the size, of the DFA can be reduced by using a compositional algorithm, CLDLf, instead. The results show that the time can be reduced for larger formulae, that is, formulae with a length above 20. However, as both algorithms produce a minimal DFA as the end product, no reduction in size (i.e., the number of states) could be made.

Le projet de cette thèse émane du constat d'une scission entre épistémologie d'une part et logique épistémique d'autre part. Si des tentatives de conciliation se sont avérées fructueuses, nous explorons ici la possibilité d'une réconciliation entre épistémologie et logique épistémique à travers l'argumentation.Étudier la logique épistémique au sein d'une pratique argumentative, c'est-À-Dire au sein de dialogues, nous permet de bénéficier d'un cadre d'étude dynamique pour explorer le dynamisme et la signification du langage de la logique épistémique. Nous montrons que cette conciliation de l'épistémologie et de la logique épistémique dans une pratique argumentative est pertinente dans le domaine juridique car elle offre une approche originale de la notion de condition dans le droit. / The project of this thesis stems from the observation of a split between epistemology and epistemic logic.If some attempts at conciliation have been successful, here we explore the possibility of reconciliation between epistemology and epistemic logic through argumentation.Studying epistemic logic in argumentative practice, that is to say in dialogues, enables us to benefit from a dynamic framework to explore the dynamics and the meaning of the language of epistemic logic.We show that this reconciliation of epistemology and epistemic logic in an argumentative practice is relevant in the legal field because it offers an original approach to the notion of condition in law.

[pt] Lógica Proposicional Dinâmica (PDL) é um sistema lógico multi-modal utilizada para especificar e verificar propriedades em programas sequenciais. Redes de Petri são um formalismo largamente utilizado na especificação de sistemas concorrentes e possuem uma interpretação gráfica bastante intuitiva. Neste trabalho apresentam-se extensões da Lógica Proposicional Dinâmica onde os programas são substituídos por Redes de Petri. Define-se uma codificação composicional para as Redes de Petri através de redes básicas, apresentando uma semântica composicional. Uma axiomatização é definida para a qual o sistema é provado ser correto, e completo em relação à semântica proposta. Três Lógicas Dinâmicas são apresentadas: uma para efetuar inferências sobre Redes de Petri Marcadas ordinárias e duas para inferências sobre Redes de Petri Estocásticas marcadas, possibilitando a modelagem de cenários mais complexos. Alguns sistemas dedutivos para essas lógicas são apresentados. A principal vantagem desta abordagem concerne em possibilitar efetuar inferências sobre Redes de Petri [Estocásticas] marcadas sem a necessidade de traduzí-las a outros formalismos. / [en] Propositional Dynamic Logic (PDL) is a multi-modal logic used for specifying and reasoning on sequential programs. Petri Net is a widely used formalism to specify and to analyze concurrent programs with a very intuitive graphical representation. In this work, we propose some extensions of Propositional Dynamic Logic for reasoning about Petri Nets. We define a compositional encoding of Petri Nets from basic nets as terms. Second, we use these terms as PDL programs and provide a compositional semantics to PDL Formulas. Then we present an axiomatization and prove completeness regarding our semantics. Three versions of Dynamic Logics to reasoning with Petri Nets are presented: one of them for ordinary Marked Petri Nets and two for Marked Stochastic Petri Nets yielding to the possibility of model more complex scenarios. Some deductive systems are presented. The main advantage of our approach is that we can reason about [Stochastic] Petri Nets using our Dynamic Logic and we do not need to translate it into other formalisms. Moreover our approach is compositional allowing for construction of complex nets using basic ones.

Les systèmes cyber-physiques mélangent des comportements physiques continus, tel la vitesse d'un véhicule, et des comportement discrets, tel que le régulateur de vitesse d'un véhicule. Ils sont désormais omniprésents dans notre société. Un grand nombre de ces systèmes sont dits critiques, i.e. une mauvaise conception entraînant un comportement non prévu, un bug, peut mettre en danger des êtres humains. Il est nécessaire de développer des méthodes pour garantir le bon fonctionnement de tels systèmes. Les méthodes formelles regroupent des procédés mathématiques pour garantir qu'un système se comporte comme attendu, par exemple que le régulateur de vitesse n'autorise pas de dépasser la vitesse maximale autorisée. De récents travaux ont permis des progrès significatifs dans ce domaine, mais l'approche adoptée est encore monolithique, i.e. que le système est modélisé d'un seul tenant et est ensuite soumis à la preuve. Notre problématique est comment modéliser efficacement des systèmes cyber-physiques dont la complexité réside dans une répétition de morceaux élémentaires. Et une fois que l'on a obtenu une modélisation, comment garantir le bon fonctionnement de tels systèmes. Notre approche consiste à modéliser le système de manière compositionnelle. Plutôt que de vouloir le modéliser d'un seul tenant, il faut le faire morceaux par morceaux, appelés composants. Chaque composant correspond à un sous-système du système final qu'il est simple de modéliser. On obtient le système complet en assemblant les composants ensembles. Ainsi une usine de traitement des eaux est obtenue en assemblant différentes cuves. L'intérêt de cette méthode est qu'elle correspond à l'approche des ingénieurs dans l'industrie : considérer des éléments séparés que l'on compose ensuite. Mais cette approche seule ne résout pas le problème de la preuve de bon fonctionnement du système. Il faut aussi rendre la preuve compositionnelle. Pour cela, on associe à chaque composant des propriétés sur ses entrées et sortie, et on prouve qu'elles sont respectées. Cette preuve peut être effectué par un expert, mais aussi par un ordinateur si les composants sont de tailles raisonnables. Il faut ensuite nous assurer que lors de l'assemblage des composants, les propriétés continuent à être respectées. Ainsi, la charge de la preuve est reportée sur les composants élémentaires, l'assurance du respect des propriétés désirées est conservée lors des étapes de composition. On peut alors obtenir une preuve du bon fonctionnement de systèmes industriels avec un coût de preuve réduit. Notre contribution majeure est de proposer une telle approche compositionnelle à la fois pour modéliser des systèmes cyber-physiques, mais aussi pour prouver qu'ils respectent les propriétés voulues. Ainsi, à chaque étape de la conception, on s'assure que les propriétés sont conservées, si possible à l'aide d'un ordinateur. Le système résultant est correct par construction. De ce résultat, nous avons proposé plusieurs outils pour aider à la conception de systèmes cyber-physiques de manière modulaire. On peut raisonner sur les propriétés temporelles de tels systèmes, par exemple est-ce que le temps de réaction d'un contrôleur est suffisamment court pour garantir le bon fonctionnement. On peut aussi raisonner sur des systèmes où un mode nominal cohabite avec un mode d'urgence. / Cyber-physical systems mix continuous physical behaviors, e.g. the velocity of a vehicle, and discrete behaviors, e.g. the cruise-controller of the vehicle. They are pervasive in our society. Numerous of such systems are safety-critical, i.e. a design error which leads to an unexpected behavior can harm humans. It is mandatory to develop methods to ensure the correct functioning of such systems. Formal methods is a set of mathematical methods that are used to guarantee that a system behaves as expected, e.g. that the cruise-controller does not allow the vehicle to exceed the speed limit. Recent works have allowed significant progress in the domain of the verification of cyber-physical systems, but the approach is still monolithic. The system under consideration is modeled in one block. Our problematic is how to efficiently model cyber-physical systems where the complexity lies in a repetition of elementary blocks. And once this modeling done, how guaranteeing the correct functioning of such systems. Our approach is to model the system in a compositional manner. Rather than modeling it in one block, we model it pieces by pieces, called components. Each component correspond to a subsystem of the final system and are easier to model due to their reasonable size. We obtain the complete system by assembling the different components. A water-plant will thus be obtained by the composition of several water-tanks. The main advantage of this method is that it corresponds to the work-flow in the industry : consider each elements separately and compose them later. But this approach does not solve the problem of the proof of correct functioning of the system. We have to make the proof compositional too. To achieve it, we associate to each component properties on its inputs and outputs, then prove that they are satisfied. This step can be done by a domain expert, but also by a computer program if the component is of a reasonable size. We have then to ensure that the properties are preserved through the composition. Thus, the proof effort is reported to elementary components. It is possible to obtain a proof of the correct functioning of industrial systems with a reduced proof effort. Our main contribution is the development of such approach in Differential Dynamic Logic. We are able to modularly model cyber-physical systems, but also prove their correct functioning. Then, at each stage of the design, we can verify that the desired properties are still guaranteed. The resulting system is correct-by-construction. From this result, we have developed several tools to help for the modular reasoning on cyber-physical systems. We have proposed a methodology to reason on temporal properties, e.g. if the execution period of a controller is small enough to effectively regulate the continuous behavior. We have also showed how we can reason on functioning modes in our framework.