Many of our axioms correspond directly, albeit much more succinctly, with those (Section 6.5.2: The domain axioms) of the propositional model. In addition, we have axioms that specify that our neighbor and equality relations are self-consistent.

Axioms asserting that the neighbor relation is anti-reflexive and symmetric:

- ∀
:(¬*x***nhbr**(,*x*))*x* - ∀
:(∀y : (nhbr (*x*,*x*) ⇒ nhbr (*y*,*y*)))*x*

Axioms asserting that "=" truly is an equality relation, i.e., it is reflexive, symmetric, and transitive.

- ∀
:(*x*=*x*)*x* - ∀
:(∀*x*: ((*y*=*x*) ⇒ (*y*=*y*)))*x* - ∀
:(∀*x*:(∀*y*: ((*z*=*x*) ∧ (*y*=*y*) ⇒ (*z*=*x*))))*z*

Axioms asserting that the neighbor counts are correct. Each of these is of the form "if location *x* has *n* neighboring pirates, then there are *n*
**distinct** unsafe neighbors of *x*, and any **other distinct** neighbor *x* is safe." We use the equality relation to specify the distinctness of each
neighbor.

In addition, we want the implications to go the opposite way. Otherwise, each of **has0**, **has1**, **has2**, and **has3** could always be
false, while still satisfying the above! For brevity, we elide the details in the following list:

- ∀
:(∀*x*: (*y***nhbr**(,*x*) ⇒*y***safe**()) ⇒*y***has0**())*x* - ∀
:(... ⇒*x***has1**())*x* - ∀
:(... ⇒*x***has2**())*x* - ∀
:(... ⇒*x***has3**())*x*

Axioms asserting that the neighbor counts are consistent. While redundant, including axioms like the following can be convenient.

- ∀
**x :****(has0 (***x*)**⇒****¬****(has1 (**∨*x*)**has2 (**∨*x*)**has3 (***x*))) - ∀
**x :****(has1 (***x*)**⇒****¬****(has0 (**∨*x*)**has2 (**∨*x*)**has3 (***x*))) - ∀
**x :****(has2 (***x*)**⇒****¬****(has0 (**∨*x*)**has1 (**∨*x*)**has3 (***x*))) - ∀
**x :****(has3 (***x*)**⇒****¬****(has0 (**∨*x*)**has1 (**∨*x*)**has2 (***x*)))

Note that this set of axioms is not quite complete, as explored in an exercise (Exercise 4.4.22).

- 506 reads