Mathematics is usually regarded as a discipline which admits no grey areas in most situations: answers are either correct or incorrect; there is a universal, objective, correct answer. On the other hand, ethical, moral and political questions are usually not "correct" or "incorrect", they are complicated and full of grey areas. This makes it extremely tempting to see the sciences and mathematics as a good way to settle disputes concerning issues like justice or equity.

Similarly, it is usually considered that mathematics is the universal language of the world, one that describes it "as it is". According to this view, mathematics is neutral in the production of scientific knowledge: the scientist discovers the mathematical rules of nature (like laws and mathematical models) and applies mathematical methods to which nature owes allegiance (like statistics and algorithms).

Recent scholarship warns about the increasing use of mathematical techniques in order to prescribe policies and produce knowledge under a veil of neutrality, and argues that we should carefully evaluate the consequences of these techniques in science and society. This Topical Collection aims at contributing to this literature.

The British Postgraduate Model Theory Conference (BPGMTC) 2023 is a Model Theory conference organised entirely by PhD students running from 18 to 20 January 2023. The conference is open to PhD students and early career researchers, one of its main goals being to bring together young researchers interested in model theory from the UK and abroad. The BPGMTC has been a longstanding tradition in the UK, this year the University of Leeds is proud to be holding the thirteenth edition of BPGMTC!

We will also have approximately 12 contributed talks by PhD students and early career researchers. In addition, we have three invited talks and an invited mini-course given by established model theorists. Registration closes on the 1st of December, but we encourage people to register as soon as possible.

Organizers of the BRIO Workshop (Bias, Risk and Opacity in AI), the ME&E-LP Workshop (Machine Ethics & Explainability - the Role of Logic Programming), and the AWARE AI Workshop (Ethics and AI, a two-way relationship) have joined efforts and created BEWARE, a forum where to discuss ideas on the emerging ethical aspects of AI, with a focus on Bias, Risk, Explainability and the role of Logic and Logic Programming. BEWARE is co-located with the AIxIA 2022 conference to be held in Udine from the 28th of November to the 2nd of December.

This workshop addresses issues of logical, ethical and epistemological nature in AI through the use of interdisciplinary approaches. We aim to bring together researchers in AI, philosophy, ethics, epistemology, social science, etc., to promote collaborations and enhance discussions towards the development of trustworthy AI methods and solutions that users and stakeholders consider technologically reliable and socially acceptable.

Organizers of the BRIO Workshop (Bias, Risk and Opacity in AI), the ME&E-LP Workshop (Machine Ethics & Explainability - the Role of Logic Programming), and the AWARE AI Workshop (Ethics and AI, a two-way relationship) have joined efforts and created BEWARE, a forum where to discuss ideas on the emerging ethical aspects of AI, with a focus on Bias, Risk, Explainability and the role of Logic and Logic Programming. BEWARE is co-located with the AIxIA 2022 conference to be held in Udine from the 28th of November to the 2nd of December.

This workshop addresses issues of logical, ethical and epistemological nature in AI through the use of interdisciplinary approaches. We aim to bring together researchers in AI, philosophy, ethics, epistemology, social science, etc., to promote collaborations and enhance discussions towards the development of trustworthy AI methods and solutions that users and stakeholders consider technologically reliable and socially acceptable.

Around thirty years after the fall of Hilbert's program, the proofs-as-programs paradigm established the view that a proof should not be identified, as in Hilbert's metamathematics, with a string of symbols in some formal system. Rather, proofs should consist in computational or epistemic objects conveying evidence to mathematical propositions. The relationship between formal derivations and proofs should then be analogous to the one between words and their meanings. This view naturally gives rise to questions such as “which conditions should a formal arrangement of symbols satisfy to represent a proof?” or “when do two formal derivations represent the same proof?". These questions underlie past and current research in proof theory both in the theoretical computer science community (e.g. categorical logic, domain theory, linear logic) and in the philosophy community (e.g. proof-theoretic semantics).

In spite of these common motivations and historical roots, it seems that today proof theorists in philosophy and in computer science are losing sight of each other. This workshop aims at contributing to a renaissance of the interaction between researchers with different backgrounds by establishing a constructive environment for exchanging views, problems and results.

The workshop series includes three events, each focusing on one specific aspect of proofs and their representation. To foster interaction and discussion, each event will consists in short talks followed by a 15 minutes slot during which participants can engage in discussion or just take a short break. The third workshop focuses on  the nature of proofs.

The VvL will hold a in-person joint seminar organized by the University of Groningen. The event is inspired by the departmental logic seminars that are organized at each university, and aims to unify the universities for a collaborative seminar. Besides hosting a main speaker, the seminar will also be the location of the award ceremony of the VvL MSc Thesis Prize winners, who will give a short presentation of their thesis.

Main speaker: Sonja Smets.
MSc Thesis Prize winners: Anna Dmitrieva (supervisor: Nick Bezhanishvili), Maximilian Siemers (supervisor: Aybüke Özgün), Dominik Wehr (supervisor: Bahareh Afshari).

The widespread use and increasing complexity of mission-critical and safety-critical systems at NASA and in the aerospace industry require advanced techniques that address these systems' specification, design, verification, validation, and certification requirements. The NASA Formal Methods Symposium (NFM) is an annual forum to foster collaboration between theoreticians and practitioners from NASA, academia, and industry. NFM's goals are to identify challenges and to provide solutions for achieving assurance for such critical systems. The focus of this symposium will be on formal techniques and other approaches for software assurance, including their theory, current capabilities and limitations, as well as their potential application to aerospace, robotics, and other NASA-relevant safety-critical systems during all stages of the software life-cycle.

Professor Gilles Brassard holds the ‘Turing Chair for Quantum Software’ at ILLC UvA, and he is hosted at QuSoft at NWO CWI. In honor of Brassard, we are organising a symposium at Science Park Amsterdam on 13 December 2022, from 13.00 – 16.00.

You are all invited to attend this special symposium, with Gilles Brassard, Maris Ozols and Ludovico Lami.

We are honored that Gilles Brassard is with us on this day to give a technical talk. Gilles Brassard (Université de Montréal) was awarded the 2023 Breakthrough Prize in Fundamental Physics, for foundational work in quantum information. He shares this prize with Charles Bennett, David Deutsch and Peter Shor.

The ILLC Colloquium is a half-yearly festive event (either the New Year's Colloquium, the Midsummernight Colloquium or the Midwinter Colloquium) that brings together the six research groups at the ILLC. Each colloquium consists of three talks by representatives from three of the six research units at the ILLC. The colloquium is concluded by a get together of the entire ILLC community.

We have the following exciting line-up, followed by drinks and snacks as usual:
  16h00-16h30: Marianna Girlando (MCL)
  16h30-17h00: Jelke Bloem (NLP&DH)
  17h00-17h30: Marieke Schouwstra (LMC)

The Amsterdam Colloquia aim to bring together linguists, philosophers, logicians, cognitive scientists and computer scientists who share an interest in the formal study of the semantics and pragmatics of natural and formal languages.

In addition to the general programme, the 23rd Amsterdam Colloquium will feature two workshops: one on Biases in Language and Cognition and one on Compositional Approaches to Projection. The Colloquium will also include a poster session, and host one evening lecture jointly organized with the E.W. Beth Foundation.

The Amsterdam Colloquia aim to bring together linguists, philosophers, logicians, cognitive scientists and computer scientists who share an interest in the formal study of the semantics and pragmatics of natural and formal languages.

In addition to the general programme, the 23rd Amsterdam Colloquium will feature two workshops: one on Biases in Language and Cognition and one on Compositional Approaches to Projection. The Colloquium will also include a poster session, and host one evening lecture jointly organized with the E.W. Beth Foundation.

The Amsterdam Colloquia aim to bring together linguists, philosophers, logicians, cognitive scientists and computer scientists who share an interest in the formal study of the semantics and pragmatics of natural and formal languages.

In addition to the general programme, the 23rd Amsterdam Colloquium will feature two workshops: one on Biases in Language and Cognition and one on Compositional Approaches to Projection. The Colloquium will also include a poster session, and host one evening lecture jointly organized with the E.W. Beth Foundation.

This topical collection is dedicated to the formal representation of arguments involving *temporal* *reasoning *and* tensed truths*; in particular, arguments with a clear significance to everyday life.

In a broad perspective, temporal reasoning can be rigorously encoded via *intensional logic*, treating tenses as modalities, or via *extensional logic*, quantifying over domains of temporal objects (e.g., instants, intervals, etc.). Nowadays there are several formal devices (languages, systems, semantics, etc.) able to deal with time in many regards. Each of these devices is characterized by peculiar features, such as a certain choice of primitive notions and, arguably, a certain kind of ontological commitment. The truth-conditions of (the propositions expressed by) statements involving tenses can be explained either in terms of the 'past-present-future' opposition (McTaggart's A-theory) or in terms of the 'earlier-later' opposition (McTaggart's B-theory). Moreover, taking into account the difference between chronologically definite propositions and chronologically indefinite propositions (Rescher 1966), it is possible to distinguish between atemporal and temporal (or *tensed*) notions of truth. This topical collection will primarily focus on the latter.