Documentation

Linglib.Studies.AloniVanOrmondt2023

[AvO23]: QBSML applied to modified numerals + split disjunction #

[AvO23] [Alo22]

Aloni & van Ormondt 2023 introduces QBSML, the first-order extension of Aloni 2022's BSML, and applies it to a battery of inferences arising from modified numerals analysed as disjunctions: at least n φ ↦ n ∨ more, at most n φ ↦ n ∨ less.

The framework's central facts (paper §5):

FactStatement
3[Pa ∨ Pb]⁺ ⊨_epi ◇Pa ∧ ◇Pb (ignorance, R state-based)
4[∀xPx ∨ Qx]⁺ ⊭ ∀x(◇Px ∧ ◇Qx) (obviation; counterexample on paper Fig. 14)
5card(s)=1 ⇒ M, s ⊨ [∀x(Px ∨ Qx)]⁺ ⇒ M, s ⊨ ∃xPx ∧ ∃xQx (distribution under full information)
6[∀x(Px ∨ Qx)]⁺ ⊨_epi ∃x◇Px ∧ ∃x◇Qx (distribution° on epistemic models)
7[□(Pa ∨ Pb)]⁺ ⊨ ◇Pa ∧ ◇Pb (□-free choice)
8[◇(Pa ∨ Pb)]⁺ ⊨ ◇Pa ∧ ◇Pb (◇-free choice; ≡ Aloni 2022 NS FC at first-order)
9[∀x◇(Px ∨ Qx)]⁺ ⊨ ∀x◇Px ∧ ∀x◇Qx (universal FC; [Che09b])
10[¬(Pa ∨ Pb)]⁺ ⊨ ¬Pa ∧ ¬Pb (negation behaviour; ignorance disappears)

Facts 3 and 5–10 are universal substrate theorems in Core/Logic/Modal/QBSML/FreeChoice.lean (framework substrate with multiple paper-anchored consumers — this file and Studies/Yan2023.lean); this file instantiates the unconditional ones at a concrete model (avoModel). Fact 4 is the paper's Fig. 14 countermodel, proved here. Facts 1–2 and Proposition 4.1 live in Core/Logic/Modal/QBSML/{Enrichment,Properties}.lean (the modal-free Proposition 4.1 against mathlib Formula.Realize is instantiated here at avoModel, the translation discharged by rfl). Fact 3 needs the individual constants of [AvO23] Definition 4.1 — QBSMLFormula.predc atoms, interpreted world-relatively via QBSMLModel.cInterp.

What is deferred #

Atoms and worlds #

The concrete model reuses Core.Logic.Modal.BSML.{FCAtom, PowerSet2World} from the existing FreeChoice substrate, ensuring AvO 2023 + Aloni 2022 both target the same world space.

Predicates and variables #

Two unary predicates P and Q: provides the non-degenerate disjunction Pa ∨ Qa matching the paper's Pa ∨ Pb schema (where the a, b are domain elements rather than predicate-instances). With monadic predicates over a 2-element domain, Pa ∨ Qa and Pa ∨ Pb are equally non-trivial instantiations of split disjunction.

Instances For
    @[implicit_reducible]
    Equations
    def AloniVanOrmondt2023.instReprQPred.repr :
    QPredStd.Format
    Equations
    • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
    Instances For

      The concrete model #

      Universal-access deontic-style model on PowerSet2World.

      The interpretation is the monadicStructure of the valuation V w P d := w.holds d: both predicates hold of d at w iff w models the atom d. The disjunction PxQx is non-degenerate at the formula level even though at this model the two interpretations coincide. A model with divergent P and Q extensions would discriminate further; this minimal model suffices for the substrate-instantiation tests below.

      Universal access (access _ = univ) means R is indisputable on every state but not state-based — same shape as Aloni2022.deonticModel.

      Equations
      • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
      Instances For

        Formulas #

        Disjunction PxQx — paper's Pa ∨ Pb-shape with two distinct predicate-instances.

        Equations
        Instances For

          The negation premise ¬(Px ∨ Qx) corresponding to the paper's ¬(Pa ∨ Pb) schema.

          Equations
          Instances For

            The narrow-scope FC premise ◇(Px ∨ Qx) corresponding to the paper's ◇(Pa ∨ Pb) schema.

            Equations
            Instances For

              The □-FC premise □(Px ∨ Qx) (paper's Fact 7 schema; derived).

              Equations
              Instances For

                Fact 10 (negation): [¬(Pa ∨ Pb)]⁺ ⊨ ¬Pa ∧ ¬Pb #

                Fact 10 (Negation behaviour) at avoModel:

                Enriched negation [¬(Px ∨ Qx)]⁺ entails the conjunction of negated disjuncts ¬Px ∧ ¬Qx. One-line invocation of the substrate's negationStrip_Q (Core/Logic/Modal/QBSML/FreeChoice.lean). Mirrors Aloni2022.aloni2022_fact11_dual_prohibition style — substrate theorem, model + NE-free witnesses applied.

                Facts 7 and 8 (free choice): [□/◇(Pa ∨ Pb)]⁺ ⊨ ◇Pa ∧ ◇Pb #

                Fact 8 (Narrow-Scope free choice / ◇-FC) at avoModel:

                Enriched possibility-disjunction [◇(Px ∨ Qx)]⁺ entails ◇Px ∧ ◇Qx. One-line invocation of narrowScopeFC_Q. The first-order analogue of Aloni2022.aloni2022_fact4_NS_FC — same template, lifted to QBSML's monadic predicate language.

                Facts 9 and 5 (universal FC and distribution) #

                Proposition 4.1 at the concrete model #

                The (unenriched) universal premise ∀x(Px ∨ Qx) translates into mathlib first-order syntax, and its support is classical Formula.Realize at every index — [AvO23] Proposition 4.1 instantiated at avoModel. The translation hypothesis is discharged by rfl: the compiler computes.

                The narrow-scope FC premise ◇(Px ∨ Qx) translates into the modal layer over the monadic signature, and its support is Kripke satisfaction at every index — the full [AvO23] Proposition 4.1 (modals included) at avoModel, the translation discharged by rfl.

                The closed standard translation of ∀x(Px ∨ Qx): quantifiers relativized to the individual sort, predicates world-relativized to the current-world variable Sum.inr 0.

                Equations
                • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                Instances For
                  theorem AloniVanOrmondt2023.stUnivPxOrQx_closed :
                  FirstOrder.Language.BoundedFormula.freeVarFinset (Core.Logic.Modal.QBSML.stClose 0 stUnivPxOrQx) =

                  The closure is a genuine sentence: the compiler computes the free-variable finset.

                  Support of ∀x(Px ∨ Qx) at a singleton forces its sort-guarded closed standard translation as a sentence of avoModel.stStructure — the compactness-ready form, with every translation step (toModal?, st?, the free-variable check) computed by the compiler.

                  Frame condition: avoModel is indisputable on every state #

                  avoModel's universal accessibility makes R indisputable on every state (every world sees the same Finset.univ). Mirrors Aloni2022.deonticModel_indisputable_on_team for the QBSML carrier.

                  Indisputability vs state-basedness (paper §4.1.1, Definition 4.10):

                  • Indisputable: all worlds in s↓ see the same accessible set (R constant).
                  • State-based: every w ∈ s↓ sees exactly s↓ (R(w) = s↓).

                  State-basedness is strictly stronger and is the precondition for the epistemic facts: Fact 3 (ignorance_Q) and Fact 6 (distributionEpi_Q), which therefore stay substrate-level (universal access is not state-based). Facts 7, 8 and 10 need no frame condition at all — they hold on every model.

                  Fact 4 (obviation): the Fig. 14 countermodel #

                  The paper's Fig. 14: a single index at the world where Pa and Qb both hold, with an empty assignment and reflexive-only access. Its universal x-extension supports the enriched disjunction by splitting horizontally (x/a supports Px, x/b supports Qx), so the enriched premise holds; but ∀x(◇Px ∧ ◇Qx) fails because the x/b index cannot see any world where P holds of b.

                  The Fig. 14 domain: exactly the paper's two objects. (The third FCAtom atom would give the universal extension an x/c index supporting neither disjunct, breaking the premise — the paper notes the split works "because the domain contains two objects".)

                  Instances For
                    @[implicit_reducible]
                    Equations
                    Equations
                    • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                    Instances For

                      Fig. 14 valuation: P holds exactly of a, and Q exactly of b, wherever the world carries the corresponding atom — so P and Q have divergent extensions, unlike avoModel's.

                      Equations
                      Instances For

                        The Fig. 14 model: reflexive-only access at the both world.

                        Equations
                        • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                        Instances For

                          The Fig. 14 state supports the enriched premise [∀x(Px ∨ Qx)]⁺: its universal extension splits into the x/a half supporting [Px]⁺ and the x/b half supporting [Qx]⁺ (paper Fig. 15).

                          The Fig. 14 state does not support ∀x(◇Px ∧ ◇Qx): at the x/b index the only accessible world is both, where P holds of a alone (paper Fig. 16's failing substate).