### Tableau Algorithm for the Clique Guarded Fragment (C Hirsch amp; S Tobies); The Complexity of Reasoning with Boolean Modal Logics (C Lutz amp; U Sattler); Outline of a Logic of Action (K Segerberg); Belief, Names, and Modes of Presentation (R Ye amp; M Fitting); and other papers. Readership: Researchers and advanced students in mathematical logic, philosophical logic, computer science logic, artificial intelligence and formal linguistics.

### TABLEAUX apos;96, Springer LNAI 1071, pp. 127{142, 1996. [5] P. A. Bonatti. A Sequent Calculus for Skeptical Default Logic. Proceedings TABLEAUX apos;97, Springer LNAI 1227, pp. 107{121, 1997. [6] D. van Dalen. Intuitionistic Logic. Handbook of Philosophical Logic, Vol. III, pp. 225{339, 1986.

### Tableaux calculi for modal predicate logics with and without the Barcan formula can be found in [32]. Just like the identity of individuals gives rise to many philosophical ques- tions in modal predicate logic, it also gives rise to many deep mathematical questions. As a result, various alternative semantic frameworks have been developed for modal predicate logic during the 1990s, including the Kripke bundles of Shehtman and Skvortsov [37] and the category-theoretic seman- tics proposed by Ghilardi [16] The notion of (axiomatic) completeness is another source of interesting mathematical questions in modal predicate logic. It turns out that the mini- mal predicate logical extension of many well-behaved and complete proposi- tional modal logics need not be complete. The main (negative) result in this area is that among the extensions of S4, propositional modal logics L whose minimal predicate logical extension is complete must have either L S5 or

### Table 1: Dining philosophers

"... In PAGE 12: ... In order to eat, a philosopher executes two nested synchronized statements, the outer one on his left fork and the inner one on his right fork. Table1 shows the results obtained byhaving 3, 4, 5, 6 philosophers acting concurrently in a non-deadlocking manner (i.e.... ..."

### Table 3: The dining philosophers

### Table 3: The dining philosophers

### Table 3 illustrates a dining philosophers program (5 philosophers) model

2005

"... In PAGE 16: ... The NotShared version lifts the dependencies of read/write memory accesses, since we know that the dining philosophers code does not use any shared memory and works merely based on locks. As shown in Table3 , a simple change like this (which means commenting out a few equations in the definition of the dependency relation) can result in a considerably better performance. Test Basic(t) Basic(n) NotShared(t) NotShared(n) Dining Philosophers 7m 6991 41s 2690 Table 3 Changing Dependency Relation.... ..."

Cited by 3