0
$\begingroup$

Book called 'Modal Logic' has an definition for validity in page 125.

It says in the first part:

"A formula $\phi$ is valid at a state w in a frame F if $\phi$ is true at w in every model (F,V) based on F".

And the notion is $F,w\models \phi $

I did use normal F letter here.

My question is that why notion has only F there? Should it be $(F,V),w\models \phi $?

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

Some terminology ...

A frame is a pair $\mathfrak F = \langle W, R \rangle$, where $W$ is a non-empty set (the set of "possible worlds") and $R$ is a partial order on $W$.

A valuation $V$ is a map associating to each sentential variable $p$ of the language a subset $V(p) \subseteq W$.

A model is a pair $\mathfrak M = \langle \mathfrak F, V \rangle$.

We say that a sentential variable $p$ is true at $w$ if $w \in V(p)$.

Let $\mathfrak M = \langle \mathfrak F, V \rangle$ a model and $x$ a point in the frame $\mathfrak F = \langle W, R \rangle$.

We define, via the usual inductive definition on the complexity of $\varphi$, the relation :

"$\varphi$ is true at $x$ in $\mathfrak M$"

and we write :

$(\mathfrak M, x) \vDash \varphi$,

starting from : $(\mathfrak M, x) \vDash p$ iff $x \in V(p)$ [here we need $V$].

A formula $\varphi$ is true at a point $x$ in $\mathfrak F$ (notation : $(\mathfrak F, x) \vDash \varphi$) if $\varphi$ is true at $x$ in every model based on $\mathfrak F$.

$\varphi$ is valid in a frame $\mathfrak F$ (notation : $\mathfrak F \vDash \varphi$) if $\varphi$ is true in all models based on $\mathfrak F$.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.