
arXiv: 1808.00710
handle: 11383/2145680 , 11383/2145656
I consider the question of which dependencies are safe for a Team Semantics-based logic FO(D), in the sense that they do not increase its expressive power over sentences when added to it. I show that some dependencies, like totality, non-constancy and non-emptiness, are safe for all logics FO(D), and that other dependencies, like constancy, are not safe for FO(D) for some choices of D despite being strongly first order. I furthermore show that the possibility operator, which holds in a team if and only if its argument holds in some nonempty subteam, can be added to any logic FO(D) without increasing its expressive power over sentences.
In Proceedings GandALF 2018, arXiv:1809.02416
FOS: Computer and information sciences, Computer Science - Logic in Computer Science, General Engineering, QA75.5-76.95, Mathematics - Logic, Other nonclassical logic, dependence logic, Logic in Computer Science (cs.LO), team semantics, Electronic computers. Computer science, QA1-939, FOS: Mathematics, General Earth and Planetary Sciences, second-order logic, Logic (math.LO), Mathematics, General Environmental Science, first-order logic
FOS: Computer and information sciences, Computer Science - Logic in Computer Science, General Engineering, QA75.5-76.95, Mathematics - Logic, Other nonclassical logic, dependence logic, Logic in Computer Science (cs.LO), team semantics, Electronic computers. Computer science, QA1-939, FOS: Mathematics, General Earth and Planetary Sciences, second-order logic, Logic (math.LO), Mathematics, General Environmental Science, first-order logic
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 5 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
