Set Theory and Logic

   

Solution of Horty's Puzzles in STIT Logic

Authors: Colin James III

In see-to-it-that logic (stit logic), three deontic examples are presented of Horty's coin betting puzzle with two agents. The form of the examples is tautologous. However, a profitability analysis by contrasting outcome for the agents shows none is tautologous. The example for the agent initiating the state of the coin as more profitable than the other agent is more closely aligned to tautology and hence the more profitable strategic outcome. What follows is that stit logic is a non tautologous fragment of the universal logic VŁ4.

Comments: Pages. © Copyright 2019 by Colin James III All rights reserved. Respond to author by email only: info@cec-services dot com. See updated abstract at ersatz-systems.com. (We warn troll Mikko at Disqus to read the article four times before hormonal typing.)

Download: PDF

Submission history

[v1] 2019-03-27 11:41:43

Unique-IP document downloads: 4 times

Vixra.org is a pre-print repository rather than a journal. Articles hosted may not yet have been verified by peer-review and should be treated as preliminary. In particular, anything that appears to include financial or legal advice or proposed medical treatments should be treated with due caution. Vixra.org will not be responsible for any consequences of actions that result from any form of use of any documents on this website.

Add your own feedback and questions here:
You are equally welcome to be positive or negative about any paper but please be polite. If you are being critical you must mention at least one specific error, otherwise your comment will be deleted as unhelpful.

comments powered by Disqus