Epistemic logics of intensional groups lift the assumption that membership in a group of agents is common knowledge. Instead of being represented directly as a set of agents, intensional groups are represented by a property that may change its extension from world to world. Several authors have considered versions of the intensional group framework where group-specifying properties are articulated using structured terms of a language, such as the language of Boolean algebras or of description logic. In this paper we formulate a general semantic framework for epistemic logics of structured intensional groups, develop the basic theory leading to completeness-via-canonicity results, and show that several frameworks presented in the literature correspond to special cases of the general framework.

Numerous logics have been developed to reason either about threshold-induced opinion diffusion in a network, or about similarity-driven network structure evolution, or about both. In this paper, we first introduce a logic containing different dynamic operators to capture changes that are 'asynchronous' (opinion change only, network-link change only) and changes that are 'synchronous' (both at the same time). Second, we show that synchronous operators cannot, in general, be replaced by asynchronous operators and vice versa. Third, we characterise the class of models on which the synchronous operator can be reduced to sequences of asynchronous operators.

Many treatments of epistemological paradoxes in modal logic proceed along the following lines. Begin with some enumeration of assumptions that are individually plausible but when taken together fail to be jointly consistent (or at any rate fail to stand to reason in some way). Thereupon proceed to propose a resolution to the emerging paradox that identifies one or more assumptions that may be comfortably discarded or weakened and that in the presence of the remaining assumptions circumvents the troubling inconsistency defining the paradox [11] (cf. Chow [8] and de Vos et al. [16]). Typical among such assumptions are logical standards expressed in the form of inference rules and axioms pertaining to knowledge and belief, such as axiom scheme K -- that is to say, the distributive axiom scheme of the form K( ϕ ψ) (K ϕ K ψ). The choice of precisely which assumptions to temper can, at times, have an element of arbitrariness to it, especially when the choice is made from among several independent alternatives underpinning distinct resolutions in the absence of clear criteria or compelling grounds for distinguishing among them.

Although modal logic is regarded as a relatively young field, its origins can be traced back to Aristotle, who explored syllogistic reasoning patterns that incorporated modalities. However, in contrast to his utterly successful assertoric syllogistic, Aristotle's examination of modal syllogisms is often viewed as error-prone and controversial, thus receiving less attention from logicians. In the literature, a large body of research on Aristotle's modal syllogistic primarily centers on the possibility of a coherent interpretation of his proposed modal systems grounded by his philosophy on necessity and contingency (see, e.g., [11, 5, 12]). We adopt a more liberal view on Aristotle's modal syllogistic, considering it as a source of inspiration for formalizing natural reasoning patterns involving modalities, rather than scrutinizing the coherence of the original systems. Our approach is encouraged by the fruitful research program of natural logic, which explores "light" logic systems that admit intuitive reasoning patterns in natural languages while balancing expressivity and computational complexity [1, 8]. In particular, various extensions of the assertoric syllogistic have been proposed and studied [8]. In this paper, we propose a systematic study on epistemic syllogistic to initiate our technical investigations of (extensions of) modal syllogistic. The choice for the epistemic modality is intentional for its ubiquitous use in natural languages. Consider the following syllogism: All C are B Some C is known to be A Some B is known to be A Taking the intuitive de re reading, the second premise and the conclusion above can be formalized as x(Cx KAx) and x(Bx KAx) respectively in first-order modal logic (FOML).

Assuming that the term 'metaverse' could be understood as a computer-based implementation of multiverse applications, we started to look in the present work for a logic that would be powerful enough to handle the situations arising both in the real and in the fictional underlying application domains. Realizing that first-order logic fails to account for the unstable behavior of even the most simpleminded information system domains, we resorted to non-conventional extensions, in an attempt to sketch a minimal composite logic strategy. The discussion was kept at a rather informal level, always trying to convey the intuition behind the theoretical notions in natural language terms, and appealing to an AI agent, namely ChatGPT, in the hope that algorithmic and common-sense approaches can be usefully combined.

We consider networks of processes that all execute the same finite-state protocol and communicate via a rendez-vous mechanism. When a process requests a rendez-vous, another process can respond to it and they both change their control states accordingly. We focus here on a specific semantics, called non-blocking, where the process requesting a rendez-vous can change its state even if no process can respond to it. In this context, we study the parameterised coverability problem of a configuration, which consists in determining whether there is an initial number of processes and an execution allowing to reach a configuration bigger than a given one. We show that this problem is EXPSPACE-complete and can be solved in polynomial time if the protocol is partitioned into two sets of states, the states from which a process can request a rendez-vous and the ones from which it can answer one. We also prove that the problem of the existence of an execution bringing all the processes in a final state is undecidable in our context. These two problems can be solved in polynomial time with the classical rendez-vous semantics.

Probabilistic hyperproperties specify quantitative relations between the probabilities of reaching different target sets of states from different initial sets of states. This class of behavioral properties is suitable for capturing important security, privacy, and system-level requirements. We propose a new approach to solve the controller synthesis problem for Markov decision processes (MDPs) and probabilistic hyperproperties. Our specification language builds on top of the logic HyperPCTL and enhances it with structural constraints over the synthesized controllers. Our approach starts from a family of controllers represented symbolically and defined over the same copy of an MDP. We then introduce an abstraction refinement strategy that can relate multiple computation trees and that we employ to prune the search space deductively. The experimental evaluation demonstrates that the proposed approach considerably outperforms HyperProb, a state-of-the-art SMT-based model checking tool for HyperPCTL. Moreover, our approach is the first one that is able to effectively combine probabilistic hyperproperties with additional intra-controller constraints (e.g.

Despite the widespread success of Transformers on NLP tasks, recent works have found that they struggle to model several formal languages when compared to recurrent models. This raises the question of why Transformers perform well in practice and whether they have any properties that enable them to generalize better than recurrent models. In this work, we conduct an extensive empirical study on Boolean functions to demonstrate the following: (i) Random Transformers are relatively more biased towards functions of low sensitivity. (ii) When trained on Boolean functions, both Transformers and LSTMs prioritize learning functions of low sensitivity, with Transformers ultimately converging to functions of lower sensitivity. (iii) On sparse Boolean functions which have low sensitivity, we find that Transformers generalize near perfectly even in the presence of noisy labels whereas LSTMs overfit and achieve poor generalization accuracy. Overall, our results provide strong quantifiable evidence that suggests differences in the inductive biases of Transformers and recurrent models which may help explain Transformer's effective generalization performance despite relatively limited expressiveness.

Visual reasoning is essential for building intelligent agents that understand the world and perform problem-solving beyond perception. Differentiable forward reasoning has been developed to integrate reasoning with gradient-based machine learning paradigms. However, due to the memory intensity, most existing approaches do not bring the best of the expressivity of first-order logic, excluding a crucial ability to solve abstract visual reasoning, where agents need to perform reasoning by using analogies on abstract concepts in different scenarios. To overcome this problem, we propose NEUro-symbolic Message-pAssiNg reasoNer (NEUMANN), which is a graph-based differentiable forward reasoner, passing messages in a memory-efficient manner and handling structured programs with functors. Moreover, we propose a computationally-efficient structure learning algorithm to perform explanatory program induction on complex visual scenes. To evaluate, in addition to conventional visual reasoning tasks, we propose a new task, visual reasoning behind-the-scenes, where agents need to learn abstract programs and then answer queries by imagining scenes that are not observed. We empirically demonstrate that NEUMANN solves visual reasoning tasks efficiently, outperforming neural, symbolic, and neuro-symbolic baselines.

Owing to their remarkable learning capabilities and performance in real-world applications, the use of machine learning systems based on Neural Networks (NNs) has been continuously increasing. However, various case studies and empirical findings in the literature suggest that slight variations to NN inputs can lead to erroneous and undesirable NN behavior. This has led to considerable interest in their formal analysis, aiming to provide guarantees regarding a given NN's behavior. Existing frameworks provide robustness and/or safety guarantees for the trained NNs, using satisfiability solving and linear programming. We proposed FANNet, the first model checking-based framework for analyzing a broader range of NN properties. However, the state-space explosion associated with model checking entails a scalability problem, making the FANNet applicable only to small NNs. This work develops state-space reduction and input segmentation approaches, to improve the scalability and timing efficiency of formal NN analysis. Compared to the state-of-the-art FANNet, this enables our new model checking-based framework to reduce the verification's timing overhead by a factor of up to 8000, making the framework applicable to NNs even with approximately $80$ times more network parameters. This in turn allows the analysis of NN safety properties using the new framework, in addition to all the NN properties already included with FANNet. The framework is shown to be efficiently able to analyze properties of NNs trained on healthcare datasets as well as the well--acknowledged ACAS Xu NNs.