In this article, I investigate the modal logic of exact equivalence (i.e., sameness of exact verifiers). In particular, by building on Kim’s exact truthmaker semantics for modal logic, I provide an answer to the following question: which sentences of the language of propositional modal logic are exactly equivalent by virtue of their logical form?

An apparent issue for the Revision Theory of definitions has long been that its most plausible versions engender $\omega $-inconsistencies. In this paper I develop a new $\omega $-consistent revision theory and use it to argue that revision theorists can and should embrace $\omega $-consistency. I show how my theory, called $\mathbf {S}^{\#N}$, withstands the theoretical pressures towards $\omega $-inconsistency and moreover compares favorably to the best $\omega $-inconsistent theories vis-à-vis several important desiderata. I tentatively conclude that $\mathbf {S}^{\#N}$ is the best known revision theory.