Decidability for some justification logics with negative introspection

Justification logics are modal logics that include justifications for the agent's knowledge. So far, there are no decidability results available for justification logics with negative introspection. In this paper, we develop a novel model construction for such logics and show that justification logics with negative introspection are decidable for finite constant specifications.

A Finite Model Property for Gödel Modal Logics

A new semantics with the finite model property is provided and used to establish decidability for Gödel modal logics based on (crisp or fuzzy) Kripke frames combined locally with Gödel logic. A similar methodology is also used to establish decidability, and indeed co-NP-completeness for a Gödel S5 logic that coincides with the one-variable fragment of first-order Gödel logic.

Herbrand Theorems for Substructural Logics

Herbrand and Skolemization theorems are obtained for a broad family of first-order substructural logics. These logics typically lack equivalent prenex forms, a deduction theorem, and reductions of semantic consequence to satisfiability. The Herbrand and Skolemization theorems therefore take various forms, applying either to the left or right of the consequence relation, and to restricted classes of formulas.

A Hennessy-Milner Property for Many-Valued Modal Logics

A Hennessy-Milner property, relating modal equivalence and bisimulations, is defined for many-valued modal logics that combine a local semantics based on a complete MTL-chain (a linearly ordered commutative integral residuated lattice) with crisp Kripke frames. A necessary and sufficient algebraic condition is then provided for the class of image-finite models of these logics to admit the Hennessy-Milner property. Complete characterizations are obtained in the case of many-valued modal logics based on BL-chains (divisible MTL-chains) that are finite or have universe [0,1], including crisp Lukasiewicz, Gödel, and product modal logics.

Skolemization for Substructural Logics

The usual Skolemization procedure, which removes strong quantifiers by introducing new function symbols, is in general unsound for first-order substructural logics defined based on classes of complete residuated lattices. However, it is shown here (following similar ideas of Baaz and Iemhoff for first-order intermediate logics in [1]) that first-order substructural logics with a semantics satisfying certain witnessing conditions admit a “parallel” Skolemization procedure where a strong quantifier is removed by introducing a finite disjunction or conjunction (as appropriate) of formulas with multiple new function symbols. These logics typically lack equivalent prenex forms. Also, semantic consequence does not in general reduce to satisfiability. The Skolemization theorems presented here therefore take various forms, applying to the left or right of the consequence relation, and to all formulas or only prenex formulas.

Torn between state and market: Private policy implementation and conflicting institutional logics

Policy implementation by private actors constitutes a “missing link” for understanding the implications of private governance. This paper proposes and assesses an institutional logics framework that combines a top-down, policy design approach with a bottom-up, implementation perspective on discretion. We argue that the conflicting institutional logics of the state and the market, in combination with differing degrees of goal ambiguity, accountability and hybridity play a crucial role for output performance. These arguments are analyzed based on a secondary analysis of seven case studies of private and hybrid policy implementation in diverging contexts. We find that aligning private output performance with public interests is at least partly a question of policy design congruence: private implementing actors tend to perform deficiently when the conflicting logics of the state and the market combine with weak accountability mechanisms.

How Much am I Expected to Pay for my Parents‘ Firm? An Institutional Logics Perspective on Family Discounts

Recent evidence suggests that successors do not simply inherit their parents’ firm, but have to pay a certain price. Building on institutional logics literature, we explore successors’ family discount expectations, defined as the rebate expected from parents in comparison to nonfamily buyers when assuming control of the firm. We find that family cohesion increases discount expectations, while successors’ fear of failure and family equity stake in the firm decrease discount expectations. Higher education in business or economics weakens These effects. On average, in our study comprised of 16 countries, successors expect a 57% family discount.