Spahn
Rollback to algebraic- and coalgebraic semantics of modal logic Rev #11

Markdown+itex2MML formatting tips (basics, extended syntax, metadata, theorems)

For a complete list of LaTeX commands supported here, see the itex2MML Commands Summary.

_your text_	→	your text
your text	→	your text
`my code`	→	`my code`
* Bulleted list * Second item	→	• Bulleted list • Second item
1. Numbered list 1. Second item	→	1. Numbered list 2. Second item
Definition list : is useful	→	Definition list is useful
[link name](URL)	→	link name
![Alt text](URL)	→	Image
## Header ## ### Subheader ### #### Subsubhead#### ##### Etc. #####	→	Header Subheader Subsubhead Etc.
***	→	Horizontal rule
Some text[^fine] here. [^fine]: The fine print.	→	A footnote
[LA]: Los Angeles [ppm]: parts per million	→	Abbreviations

Wiki words

Two or more uppercase words stuck together (camel case) or any phrase surrounded by double brackets is a wiki word. A camel-case wiki word can be escaped by putting \ in front of it.

Wiki words: HomePage, ThreeWordsTogether, [[C++]], [[Let's play again!]]
Not wiki words: IBM, School

This entry is about

* Yde Venema, Algebras and Coalgebras, §6 (p.332-426)in Blackburn, van Benthem, Wolter, Handbook of modal logic, Elsevier, 2007.

The bibliography lists many articles of Robert Goldblatt and Bart Jacobs on modal logic.

## 1 Introduction

(p.332)

(...)

An important difference of the coalgebraic approach compared to the algebraic one is that coalgebras *generalize* rather than *dualize* the model theory of modal logic. One may generalize the concept of modal logic from Kripke frames to arbitrary coalgebras. In fact the link between modal logic and coalgebra is so strong that one may claim that modal logic is the natural logic for coalgebras (just like equational logic is that for algebra)

## 9 Coalgebras: an introduction

(p.389)

The notion of *coalgebra* was formed in the sixties but the topic attracted a wider attention only when was realized that coalgebras can be seen as a general uniform theory of dynamic systems.

We list some applications (or examples) of the theory of coalgebras.

* The main examples for coalgebras are *Kripke frames*.

* Aczel in \[non-well founded sets] models transition systems and non-well fondet sets as coalgebras.

* Barwise-Moss in \[Vicious Circles] discuss notions of circularity and self-reference (and many (other) applications).

* Rutten \[Automata and coinduction] on coalgebras and deterministic automata.

(Definition 146, p.392) A *[[nLab:polynomial functor]]* is a $Set$-valued functor inductively defined by

$$K::=I | C | K_0 + K_1 | K_0\times K_1 | K^D$$

where $I$ denotes the identity functor, $C$ denotes the constant functor on an object $C$, $K_0 +K_1$ denotes the coproduct functor of two polynomial functors, and likewise for the product functor, $K^D$ denotes the exponent functor $X\mapsto K(X)^D$.

A *Kripke polynomial functor* is inductively defined by

$$K::=I | C | K_0 + K_1 | K_0\times K_1 | K^D | P K$$

where $P K$ denotes the composition of a polynomial functor with the power set functor.

(...)

## 13 Modal logic and coalgebras

(p.406)

The initial ideas in this section are attributed to L. Moss:

* Coalgebraic logic. Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, 96:277–317, 1999. (Erratum published
Ann.P.Appl.Log. 99:241–259, 1999).

* J. Barwise and L. Moss. Vicious Circles, volume 60 of CSLI Lecture Notes. CSLI Publications, 1996.

### Introduction

Let $\phi$ be a set of formulas.

$$\nabla \phi:=\Box\bigvee \phi \wedge \bigwedge \diamond\phi$$

where $\diamond \phi:=\{\diamond \varphi|\varphi\in \phi\}$ and likewise $\Box\phi$. Then we have

$$\diamond\varphi \simeq \nabla\{\varphi,\top\}$$

$$\Box \varphi\simeq\nabla\varnothing\vee\nabla\{\varphi\}$$

Let $\mathbb{S}:=\langle S,\lambda,R[\cdot]\rangle$ be a *modal model in coalgebraic shape*(§9 Example 143). Then $\mathbb{S},s\Vdash\nabla \phi$ iff $(R[s],\phi)$ belongs to the *relation lifting* (§11) $\overline{\mathcal{P}}(\Vdash_{\mathbb{S}})$ of the satisfaction relation $\Vdash_{\mathbb{S}}\subseteq S\times \phi$: Every $\varphi\in \Phi$ must hold at some successor $t\in R[s]$, and at every successor $t$ of some $\varphi\in \phi$ must hold.

The previous lines are the founding insights to *coalgebraic logic* in which the same principle is applied to an arbitrary set functor $\Omega$ and the basic idea is to have
$$\mathbb{S},s\Vdash_{\mathbb{S}}\nabla P\;\text{iff}\; (P,\sigma(s))\in \overline{\Omega}(\Vdash_{\mathbb{S}}).$$
In this situation, the satisfaction relation is much like a [[nLab:bisimulation]] between a language and a coalgebra; for this see

* A. Baltag. A logic for coalgebraic simulation. In
  * H. Reichel, editor. Coalgebraic Methods in Computer Science (CMCS’00), volume 33 of Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science. Elsevier, 2000.

### Definition

For the existence of the *language of  coalgebraic formulas for $\Omega$* it is necessary to allow class based algebras. This may be accomplished by  letting  $\Omega^+$ be the unique extension of $\Omega$ to a set based functor on the category $SET$ having classes as objects and set-continuous (standard) set functors as morphisms.  In examples these functors are often [[polynomial functor]]s; e.g. Kripke functors are of this kind.

+-- {: .un_defn}
###### Definition
The initial algebra of the functor $(P+\Omega)^+$ is called the *language of  coalgebraic formulas for $\Omega$* and is denoted by
$$\langle\mathcal{L}_\Omega, \bigwedge,\nabla\rangle.$$
=--

Unwinding this definition yields the following equivalent characterization.
+--{: .un_defn}
###### Definition
Let $\Omega:Set\to Set$ be (for convenience) be a set functor sending inlusions to inclusions (call this a *standard set functor*). Then the *language of coalgebraic formulas* denoted by $\mathcal{L}_\Omega$ is defined to be the least class $C$ such that

(1) $\phi\in \mathcal{L}_\Omega$ implies $\bigwedge\phi\in \mathcal{L}_\Omega$.

(2) $P\in \Omega^+(\mathcal{L}_\Omega)$ implies $\nabla P\in \mathcal{L}_\Omega$.Let $\Omega^+$ is the unique extension of $\Omega$ to a set based functor on the category $SET$ having classes as objects and set-continuous (standard) set functors as morphisms.
=--

+-- {: .un_defn}
###### Definition (p.411)
Let $\Omega:\Set\to Set$ be a functor, let $\nu:\Omega\to Prop$ be some natural transformation, let $\bigwedge$ be some collection of natural transformations $\Omega\to \mathcal{P}$. then $\mathcal{L}_{\nu,\bigwedge}$ is the standard modal language obtained by taking $Prop$ as the collection off propositional variables, and $\tau_\bigwedge:=\{\diamond_\lambda|\lambda\in \bigwedge\}$ as the modal similarity type.
=--

Predicate liftings (from $\mathcal{P} S\to \mathcal{P}\Omega S$ can be used to obtain modal operators.
+-- {: .un_defn}
###### Definition (p.412)
A *predicate lifting for a set functor $\Omega$* is a natural transformation $\mu:\check{\mathcal{P}}\to \check{\mathcal{P}} \Omega$ where $\check{P}$ denotes the contravariant power set functor. Which each predicate lifting we can associate a modal operator $\diamond_\mu$ with the following semantics:

$$\mathbb{S},s\Vdash \diamond_\lambda \varphi\;\text{iff}\;\sigma(s)\in \mu_S([[\varphi]]).$$
=--

## References

For polynomial functors see also the references at [[nLab:polynomial functor]]. In particular

* (Joachim) Kock, Joyal, Batanin, Mascari, Polynomial functors and opetopes, [arXiv:0706.1033](http://arxiv.org/abs/0706.1033)

*  Joachim Kock. Polynomial functors and trees. Preprint, [arXiv:0807.2874](http://arxiv.org/abs/0807.2874)

* Nicola Gambino and Joachim Kock (2009); Polynomial functors and [[polynomial monad]]s; [arXiv](http://arxiv.org/abs/0906.4931).

as | Cancel (unlocks page)

Spahn Rollback to algebraic- and coalgebraic semantics of modal logic Rev #11

Markdown+itex2MML formatting tips (basics, extended syntax, metadata, theorems)

Wiki words

Spahn
Rollback to algebraic- and coalgebraic semantics of modal logic Rev #11