Try   HackMD

Part of a presentation on Coalgebras over Lawvere Metric Spaces

Coalgebraic Logic over Sets

Is there a systematic way to associate with every functor

T a modal logic?

Example

Paradigmatic Example: For coalgebras for the powerset functor (Kripke frames in modal logic), we define the semantics of a 'modal operator' for a coalgebra

ξ:xPX, for a state
xX
, for a formula
φ
via
xφyξ(x).yφ

Fact: Modal formulas are invariant under bisimulation.

The Framework

How can we generalise this to arbitrary functors

T:SetSet?

To capture classical propositional (Boolean) logic, we start from the adjunction

PS:SetopBA where
BA
is the category of Boolean algebras.

Image Not Showing Possible Reasons
  • The image was uploaded to a note which you don't have access to
  • The note which the image was originally uploaded to has been deleted
Learn More →

  • P
    and
    S
    are contravariant functors.
    PX
    is the algebra of propositions over
    X
    . In our examples it is given by
    PX=Set(X,2)
    .
    SB
    is the set (space, spectrum) of
    B
    given by
    SX=BA(B,2)
    . In both cases,
    2
    stands for a suitable object of two truth values.
  • T
    represents the type of one-step transitions of coalgebras
    XTX
    as before.
  • L
    is a functor on BA, usually defined to be the dual of
    T
    . The category of
    L
    -algebras is the algebraic semantics of the modal logic induced by
    T
    .

To explain the last item, given a coalgebra

XξTX, a state (world)
xX
and a formula
φ
in the initial
L
-algebra, we need to define the semantics
xφ.

This is achieved by lifting the functor

P to (co)algebras
Coalg(T)P¯Alg(L)

Now let

I be the initial
L
-algebra and
[[]]ξ:IP¯(X,ξ)
the unique arrow into the `complex algebra' of
(X,ξ)
. We then define
xφ def x[[φ]]ξ.

In order to lift

P, we need a natural transformation
δ:LPPT,

which gives rise to the definition

P¯(XTX)=LPXPTXPX.

Intuitively, as we will see in the examples,

δ is the one-step semantics of the logic. The extension to general formulas is taken care of by the induction implicit in the initial algebra morphism
[[]]ξ:IP¯(X,ξ)
.

Example: In classical modal logic we take

T=P and
LB
to be the free Boolean algebra generated by
{bbB}
and quotiented by the equations stipulating that
preserves finite conjunctions. Since
LB
is a free Boolean algebra it suffices to define
δ
on generators. To capture the idea that
b
holds if the set of successors
c
is a subset of
b
, we define
δX(b)={cPXcb}.

Remark: To verify that the definition of

δX indeed captures the familiar semantics of modal logic, we calculate
xφx[[φ]]ξdef of xP¯ξ([[φ]]ξ)[[]]ξ is an L-algebra morphismxPξ(δX([[φ]]ξ))def of P¯ξ(x)δX([[φ]]ξ)Pξ=ξ1ξ(x){cc[[φ]]ξ}def of δξ(x)[[φ]]ξ,set comprehension

which also amounts to `chasing' an element

ϕ from the top-left corner to the bottom-right in the diagram defining the unique morphism
[[]]ξ
from the intial algebra
LII
to the dual
P¯(X,ξ)
of the coalgebra
ξ:XTX
:

Image Not Showing Possible Reasons
  • The image was uploaded to a note which you don't have access to
  • The note which the image was originally uploaded to has been deleted
Learn More →

Importantly, the above generalises to arbitrary functors

T on
Set
in a uniform way.

Summary and Outlook

Here are some facts worth emphasizing.

  • For every
    T
    , one can define
    L
    as the dual of
    T
    .
  • Such a functor
    L
    has a presentation by operations and equations.
  • It follows that the category
    Alg(L)
    of algebras for the functor
    L
    is a variety in the sense of universal algebra.
  • In particular,
    Alg(L)
    is the algebraic semantics of a propositional modal logic.
  • To summarize, every set-functor
    T
    induces a modal logic
    LT
    in a canonical way.
  • LT
    is
    • invariant under behavioural equivalence
    • complete for
      T
      -coalgebras
    • expressive [1] if
      T
      is finitary.
  • Logics are closed under composition, that is,
    LT1T2=LT1LT2
    .

Remark: There is some beautiful category theory hiding behind these items. Many classical topics play a role, such as distributive laws, sifted colimits, reflexive coequalizers, monadic functors that do (or don't) compose, locally finitely presentable and algebraic categories, presentations of functors by operations and equations, presheaf categories and completion of categories, Stone type dualities, relation lifting, and even more will come once we move to enriched category theory.

References

More references and details for the items discussed above can be found in the following publications.

A. Kurz, J. Rosicky: Strongly complete logics for coalgebras. LMCS 8 (3:14) 2012. (The draft from July 2006 for reference: .ps, .pdf, .dvi).

A. Kurz, D. Petrisan: Presenting functors on many-sorted varieties and applications. Information and Computation, Volume 208, Issue 12, December 2010, Pages 1421-1446. (pdf)

C. Cirstea, A. Kurz, D. Pattinson, L. Schröder, Y. Venema: Modal Logics are Coalgebraic. BCS Visions in Computer Science 2008. (.pdf )

M. Bonsangue, A. Kurz: Presenting Functors by Operations and Equations. January 2006 (supersedes drafts from Feb and Oct 2005). (.dvi .ps .pdf). Fossacs 2006.

M. Bonsangue, A. Kurz: Duality for Logics of Transition Systems. Fossacs 2005. (replaces a draft of October 2004 and extends an abstract presented at TANCL , Tbilisi 7 - 11 July 2003) (.dvi, .pdf, .ps)

C. Kupke, A. Kurz, D. Pattinson: Algebraic Semantics for
Coalgebraic Modal Logic.
CMCS 2004. (.dvi, .pdf (recompiled with diagrams))


  1. A logic is expressive if any two states that are not behaviourally equivalent are distinguished by some formula. ↩︎