Inductive Inference and Epistemic Modal Logic (Invited Talk)

Author Nina Gierasimczuk

Thumbnail PDF


  • Filesize: 0.71 MB
  • 16 pages

Document Identifiers

Author Details

Nina Gierasimczuk
  • Department of Applied Mathematics and Computer Science, Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark

Cite AsGet BibTex

Nina Gierasimczuk. Inductive Inference and Epistemic Modal Logic (Invited Talk). In 31st EACSL Annual Conference on Computer Science Logic (CSL 2023). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 252, pp. 2:1-2:16, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2023)


This paper is concerned with a link between inductive inference and dynamic epistemic logic. The bridge was first introduced in [Gierasimczuk, 2009; Nina Gierasimczuk, 2009; Gierasimczuk, 2010]. We present a synthetic view on subsequent contributions: inductive truth-tracking properties of belief revision policies seen as belief upgrade methods; topological interpretation and characterisation of inductive inference; discussion of the adequacy of the topological semantics of modal logic for characterising inductive inference. We briefly present the topological Dynamic Logic for Learning Theory. Finally, we discuss several surprising results obtained in computational inductive inference that challenge the usual understanding of certainty, and of rational inquiry as consistent and conservative learning.

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Theory of computation → Modal and temporal logics
  • Theory of computation → Models of learning
  • modal logic
  • dynamic epistemic logic
  • inductive inference
  • topological semantics
  • computational learning theory
  • finite identifiability
  • identifiability in the limit


  • Access Statistics
  • Total Accesses (updated on a weekly basis)
    PDF Downloads


  1. Carlos E. Alchourrón, Peter Gärdenfors, and David Makinson. On the logic of theory change: Partial meet contraction and revision functions. The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 50(2):510-530, 1985. Google Scholar
  2. Dana Angluin. Inductive inference of formal languages from positive data. Information and Control, 45(2):117-135, 1980. Google Scholar
  3. Alexandru Baltag, Nina Gierasimczuk, Aybüke Özgün, Ana Lucia Vargas Sandoval, and Sonja Smets. A dynamic logic for learning theory. Journal of Logical and Algebraic Methods in Programming, 109:100485, 2019. Google Scholar
  4. Alexandru Baltag, Nina Gierasimczuk, and Sonja Smets. Belief revision as a truth-tracking process. In K. Apt, editor, TARK'11: Proceedings of the 13th Conference on Theoretical Aspects of Rationality and Knowledge, Groningen, The Netherlands, July 12-14, 2011, pages 187-190. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 2011. Google Scholar
  5. Alexandru Baltag, Nina Gierasimczuk, and Sonja Smets. On the solvability of inductive problems: A study in epistemic topology. In R. Ramanujam, editor, Proceedings Fifteenth Conference on Theoretical Aspects of Rationality and Knowledge, TARK 2015, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, USA, June 4-6, 2015, volume 215 of EPTCS, pages 81-98, 2015. Google Scholar
  6. Alexandru Baltag, Nina Gierasimczuk, and Sonja Smets. Truth-tracking by belief revision. Studia Logica, 107(5):917-947, 2019. Google Scholar
  7. Alexandru Baltag, Lawrence S. Moss, and Slawomir Solecki. The logic of public announcements, common knowledge, and private suspicions. In Itzhak Gilboa, editor, TARK'98: Proceedings of the 7th Conference on Theoretical Aspects of Rationality and Knowledge, pages 43-56, San Francisco, CA, USA, 1998. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc. Google Scholar
  8. Alexandru Baltag and Bryan Renne. Dynamic Epistemic Logic. In Edward N. Zalta, editor, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, Winter 2016 edition, 2016. Google Scholar
  9. Alexandru Baltag and Sonja Smets. A qualitative theory of dynamic interactive belief revision. In G. Bonanno, W. van der Hoek, and M. Wooldridge, editors, LOFT'08: Proceedings of 8th Conference on Logic and the Foundations of Game and Decision Theory, number 3 in Texts in Logic and Games, pages 9-58. Amsterdam University Press, 2008. Google Scholar
  10. Johan van Benthem. Dynamic logic for belief revision. Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics, 2:129-155, 2007. Google Scholar
  11. Johan van Benthem and Guram Bezhanishvili. Modal logics of space. In Marco Aiello, Ian Pratt-Hartmann, and Johan Van Benthem, editors, Handbook of Spatial Logics, pages 217-298. Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, 2007. Google Scholar
  12. Thomas Bolander and Nina Gierasimczuk. Learning actions models: Qualitative approach. In Wiebe van der Hoek, Wesley H. Holliday, and Wen-Fang Wang, editors, Logic, Rationality, and Interaction - 5th International Workshop, LORI 2015 Taipei, Taiwan, October 28-31, 2015, Proceedings, volume 9394 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 40-52. Springer, 2015. Google Scholar
  13. Thomas Bolander and Nina Gierasimczuk. Learning to act: qualitative learning of deterministic action models. Journal of Logic and Computation, 28(2):337-365, 2018. Google Scholar
  14. Thomas Bolander, Nina Gierasimczuk, and Andrés Occhipinti Liberman. Learning to act and observe in partially observable domains. In Nick Bezhanishvili, Rosalie Iemhoff, and Fan Yang, editors, Outstanding Contributions to Logic: Dick de Jongh on intuitionistic and provability logics. Springer, 2023. Google Scholar
  15. John Case and Timo Kötzing. Topological separations in inductive inference. Theoretical Computer Science, 620:33-45, 2016. Google Scholar
  16. Andrew Dabrowski, Lawrence S. Moss, and Rohit Parikh. Topological reasoning and the logic of knowledge. Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, 78(1):73-110, 1996. Papers in honor of the Symposium on Logical Foundations of Computer Science, Logic at St. Petersburg. Google Scholar
  17. Matthew de Brecht and Akihiro Yamamoto. Topological properties of concept spaces. Information and Computation, 208(4):327-340, 2010. Google Scholar
  18. Dick de Jongh and Ana Lucia Vargas-Sandoval. Finite identification with positive and with complete data. In Alexandra Silva, Sam Staton, Peter Sutton, and Carla Umbach, editors, Language, Logic, and Computation, pages 42-63, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2019. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. Google Scholar
  19. Hans van Ditmarsch, Wiebe Van der Hoek, and Barteld Kooi. Dynamic Epistemic Logic. Springer, The Netherlands, 2007. Google Scholar
  20. Nina Gierasimczuk. Bridging learning theory and dynamic epistemic logic. Synthese, 169(2):371-384, 2009. Google Scholar
  21. Nina Gierasimczuk. Learning by erasing in dynamic epistemic logic. In Adrian Horia Dediu, Armand Mihai Ionescu, and Carlos Martin-Vide, editors, LATA'09: Proceedings of 3rd International Conference on Language and Automata Theory and Applications, Tarragona, Spain, April 2-8, 2009, volume 5457 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 362-373. Springer, The Netherlands, 2009. Google Scholar
  22. Nina Gierasimczuk. Knowing One’s Limits. Logical Analysis of Inductive Inference. PhD thesis, Universiteit van Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2010. Google Scholar
  23. Nina Gierasimczuk and Dick de Jongh. On the complexity of conclusive update. The Computer Journal, 56(3):365-377, 2013. Google Scholar
  24. E. Mark Gold. Language identification in the limit. Information and Control, 10:447-474, 1967. Google Scholar
  25. John L. Kelley. General topology. Springer-Verlag New York, 1975. Google Scholar
  26. Steffen Lange, Rolf Wiehagen, and Thomas Zeugmann. Learning by erasing. In Setsuo Arikawa and Arun Sharma, editors, ALT, volume 1160 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 228-241. Springer, 1996. Google Scholar
  27. Steffen Lange and Thomas Zeugmann. Types of monotonic language learning and their characterization. In COLT'92: Proceedings of the 5th Annual ACM Conference on Computational Learning Theory, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, July 27-29, 1992, pages 377-390. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1992. Google Scholar
  28. John C. C. McKinsey and Alfred Tarski. The algebra of topology. Annals of Mathematics, 1944. Google Scholar
  29. Yasuhito Mukouchi. Characterization of finite identification. In Klaus Jantke, editor, AII'92: Proceedings of the International Workshop on Analogical and Inductive Inference, Dagstuhl Castle, Germany, October 5-9, 1992, volume 642 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 260-267. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, 1992. Google Scholar
  30. Daniel Osherson, Michael Stob, and Scott Weinstein. Systems that Learn. M.I.T. Press, Cambridge, MA, USA, 1986. Google Scholar
  31. Jan Plaza. Logics of public communications. In M.L. Emrich, M.S. Pfeifer, M. Hadzikadic, and Z.W. Ras, editors, Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Methodologies for Intelligent Systems, pages 201-216, 1989. Google Scholar
  32. Ana Lucía Vargas Sandoval. On the Path to the Truth: Logical and Computational Aspects of Learning. PhD thesis, Universiteit van Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2020. Google Scholar
  33. Oliver Schulte. Formal Learning Theory. In Edward N. Zalta, editor, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, Summer 2022 edition, 2022. Google Scholar
  34. Olivier Schulte and Cory Juhl. Topology as epistemology. Monist, 79(1):141-147, 1996. Google Scholar
  35. Raymond M. Smullyan. Undecidability and recursive inseparability. Zeitschrift für Mathematische Logik und Grundlagen der Mathematik, 4(7-11):143-147, 1958. Google Scholar
  36. Wolfgang Spohn. Ordinal conditional functions: A dynamic theory of epistemic states. In Brian Skyrms and William L. Harper, editors, Causation in Decision, Belief Change, and Statistics, volume II, pages 105-134. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 1988. Google Scholar
  37. Steven Vickers. Topology Via Logic. Cambridge University Press, 1996. Google Scholar
  38. Rolf Wiehagen and Thomas Zeugmann. Ignoring data may be the only way to learn efficiently. J. Exp. Theor. Artif. Intell., 6(1):131-144, 1994. Google Scholar
  39. Thomas Zeugmann, Steffen Lange, and Shyam Kapur. Characterizations of monotonic and dual monotonic language learning. Information and Computation, 120(2):155-173, 1995. Google Scholar
Questions / Remarks / Feedback

Feedback for Dagstuhl Publishing

Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail