 By analogy, recall modal logic, where different properties of the two-place accessibility relation \(R^2xy\) will generate different modal logics (for example, to get the modal logic \(T\) one makes \(R^2xy\) reflexive, to get the modal logic \(S4\) one makes \(R^2xy\) reflexive and transitive and so on). Similar decisions can be made with regard to the ternary relation \(Rxyz\). For example, one might want \(Rxyz\) to have the properties of commutativity, associativity, contraction, monotonicity, and others, or none at all, or subtle combinations of these and more. These decisions will generate different logics of information channels in the same way as do the choices on \(R^2\) with regard to different modal logics. These logics are known in general as substructural logics on account of the way the properties of the ternary accessibility relation (commutation etc.), correspond to the structural rules that individuate the logics themselves. (One may think of structural rules as the syntactic/proof-theoretic counterparts to the semantic conditions being discussed presently.) As a part of the growing field of  logic and information  more generally, we will see in the following section that clusters of such logics have found utility across a range of informational-semantic phenomena.