# Decidable Fragments of First-Order and Fixed-Point Logic

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "Decidable Fragments of First-Order and Fixed-Point Logic"

## Transcription

1 From prefix-vocabulary classes to guarded logics Aachen University

2 The classical decision problem part of Hilbert s formalist programme for the foundations of mathematics in modern terminology: find an algorithm that solves the satisfiability problem for first-order logic D. Hilbert and W. Ackermann: Das Entscheidungsproblem ist gelöst, wenn man ein Verfahren kennt, das bei einem vorgelegten logischen Ausdruck durch endlich viele Operationen die Entscheidung über die Allgemeingültigkeit bzw. Erfüllbarkeit erlaubt. (...) Das Entscheidungsproblem muss als das Hauptproblem der mathematischen Logik bezeichnet werden. Grundzüge der theoretischen Logik (1928), pp 73ff

3 The classical decision problem part of Hilbert s formalist programme for the foundations of mathematics in modern terminology: find an algorithm that solves the satisfiability problem for first-order logic D. Hilbert and W. Ackermann: The decision problem is solved when we know a procedure that allows, for any given logical expression, to decide by finitely many operations its validity or satisfiability. (...) The decision problem must be considered the main problem of mathematical logic. Grundzüge der theoretischen Logik (1928), pp 73ff

4 The classical decision problem part of Hilbert s formalist programme for the foundations of mathematics in modern terminology: find an algorithm that solves the satisfiability problem for first-order logic D. Hilbert and W. Ackermann: The decision problem is solved when we know a procedure that allows, for any given logical expression, to decide by finitely many operations its validity or satisfiability. (...) The decision problem must be considered the main problem of mathematical logic. Grundzüge der theoretischen Logik (1928), pp 73ff Similar statements by many other logicians, including Bernays, Schönfinkel, Herbrand, von Neumann,...

5 Early results: decision procedures Decision algorithms for fragments of first-order logic the monadic predicate calculus (Löwenheim 1915, Kalmár 1929) the prefix class (Bernays Schönfinkel 1928, Ramsey 1932) the -prefix class (Ackermann 1928) the 2 -prefix class, without equality (Gödel, Kalmár, Schütte )

6 Early results: decision procedures Decision algorithms for fragments of first-order logic the monadic predicate calculus (Löwenheim 1915, Kalmár 1929) the prefix class (Bernays Schönfinkel 1928, Ramsey 1932) the -prefix class (Ackermann 1928) the 2 -prefix class, without equality (Gödel, Kalmár, Schütte ) These are often called the classical solvable cases of the decision problem.

7 Early results: reduction classes A fragment X FO is a reduction class if there is a computable function f : FO X such that ψ satisfiable f (ψ) satisfiable Early reduction classes: relational sentences without = (the pure predicate calculus) dyadic sentences (only predicates of arity 2) -sentences, or relational -sentences (Skolem normal form) only one binary predicate (Kalmár 1936) relational 3 -sentences (Gödel 1933)

8 The undecidability of first-order logic Theorem (Church 1936, Turing 1937) The satisfiability problem for first-order logic is undecidable.

9 The undecidability of first-order logic Theorem (Church 1936, Turing 1937) The satisfiability problem for first-order logic is undecidable. Theorem (Trakhtenbrot 1950, Craig 1950) The satisfiability problem for first-order logic on finite structures is undecidable.

10 The undecidability of first-order logic Theorem (Church 1936, Turing 1937) The satisfiability problem for first-order logic is undecidable. Theorem (Trakhtenbrot 1950, Craig 1950) The satisfiability problem for first-order logic on finite structures is undecidable. = there is no sound and complete proof system for validity on finite structures

11 The undecidability of first-order logic Theorem (Church 1936, Turing 1937) The satisfiability problem for first-order logic is undecidable. Theorem (Trakhtenbrot 1950, Craig 1950) The satisfiability problem for first-order logic on finite structures is undecidable. = there is no sound and complete proof system for validity on finite structures After the negative solution, the decision problem did not disappear, but became a classification problem.

12 The decision problem as a classification problem For which classes X FO is Sat(X) decidable, which are reduction classes? Similarly for satisfiablity on finite structures

13 The decision problem as a classification problem For which classes X FO is Sat(X) decidable, which are reduction classes? Similarly for satisfiablity on finite structures Which classes have the finite model property, which contain infinity axioms?

14 The decision problem as a classification problem For which classes X FO is Sat(X) decidable, which are reduction classes? Similarly for satisfiablity on finite structures Which classes have the finite model property, which contain infinity axioms? Complexity of decidable cases?

15 The decision problem as a classification problem For which classes X FO is Sat(X) decidable, which are reduction classes? Similarly for satisfiablity on finite structures Which classes have the finite model property, which contain infinity axioms? Complexity of decidable cases? What kind of classes X FO should be considered? There are continuum many such classes, one cannot study all of them. A direction is needed.

16 The decision problem as a classification problem For which classes X FO is Sat(X) decidable, which are reduction classes? Similarly for satisfiablity on finite structures Which classes have the finite model property, which contain infinity axioms? Complexity of decidable cases? What kind of classes X FO should be considered? There are continuum many such classes, one cannot study all of them. A direction is needed. In view of the early results, most attention (in logic) was given to classes determined by quantifier prefix and vocabulary, i.e. the number and arity of relation and function symbols.

17 Prefix-vocabulary classes [Π, (p 1, p 2,...), (f 1, f 2,...)] (=)

18 Prefix-vocabulary classes [Π, (p 1, p 2,...), (f 1, f 2,...)] (=) Π is a word over {,,, }, describing set of quantifier prefixes

19 Prefix-vocabulary classes [Π, (p 1, p 2,...), (f 1, f 2,...)] (=) Π is a word over {,,, }, describing set of quantifier prefixes p m, f m ω indicate how many relation and function symbols of arity m may occur

20 Prefix-vocabulary classes [Π, (p 1, p 2,...), (f 1, f 2,...)] (=) Π is a word over {,,, }, describing set of quantifier prefixes p m, f m ω indicate how many relation and function symbols of arity m may occur presence or absence of = indicates whether the formulae may contain equality

21 Prefix-vocabulary classes [Π, (p 1, p 2,...), (f 1, f 2,...)] (=) Π is a word over {,,, }, describing set of quantifier prefixes p m, f m ω indicate how many relation and function symbols of arity m may occur presence or absence of = indicates whether the formulae may contain equality Example: [, (ω, 1), all] =

22 Prefix-vocabulary classes [Π, (p 1, p 2,...), (f 1, f 2,...)] (=) Π is a word over {,,, }, describing set of quantifier prefixes p m, f m ω indicate how many relation and function symbols of arity m may occur presence or absence of = indicates whether the formulae may contain equality Example: [, (ω, 1), all] = sentences x 1... x m y z 1... z n φ where φ is quantifier-free and contains at most one binary predicate, and no predicates of arity 3, may contain any number of monadic predicates, may contain any number of function symbols of any arity, may contain equality.

23 The complete classification: undecidable cases A: Pure predicate logic (without functions, without =) (1) [, (ω, 1), (0)] (Kahr 1962) (2) [ 3, (ω, 1), (0)] (Surányi 1959) (3) [, (0, 1), (0)] (Kalmár-Surányi 1950) (4) [, (0, 1), (0)] (Denton 1963) (5) [, (0, 1), (0)] (Gurevich 1966) (6) [ 3, (0, 1), (0)] (Kalmár-Surányi 1947) (7) [, (0, 1), (0)] (Kostyrko-Genenz 1964) (8) [, (0, 1), (0)] (Surányi 1959) (9) [ 3, (0, 1), (0)] (Surányi 1959)

24 The complete classification: undecidable cases B: Classes with functions or equality (10) [, (0), (2)] = (Gurevich 1976) (11) [, (0), (0, 1)] = (Gurevich 1976) (12) [ 2, (0, 1), (1)] (Gurevich 1969) (13) [ 2, (1), (0, 1)] (Gurevich 1969) (14) [ 2, (ω, 1), (0)] = (Goldfarb 1984) (15) [ 2, (0, 1), (0)] = (Goldfarb 1984) (16) [ 2, (0, 1), (0)] = (Goldfarb 1984)

25 The complete classification: decidable cases (Exclude the trivial classes: finite prefix and finite relational vocabulary) A: Classes with the finite model property (1) [, all, (0)] = (Bernays, Schönfinkel 1928) (2) [ 2, all, (0)] (Gödel 1932, Kalmár 1933, Schütte 1934) (3) [all, (ω), (ω)] (Löb 1967, Gurevich 1969) (4) [, all, all] (Gurevich 1973) (5) [, all, all] = (Gurevich 1976) B: Classes with infinity axioms (6) [all, (ω), (1)] = (Rabin 1969) (7) [, all, (1)] = (Shelah 1977)

26 Why prefix-vocabulary classes? historical reasons

27 Why prefix-vocabulary classes? historical reasons simple, syntactically defined classes

28 Why prefix-vocabulary classes? historical reasons simple, syntactically defined classes a finite classification can a priori be proved to exist.

29 Why prefix-vocabulary classes? historical reasons simple, syntactically defined classes a finite classification can a priori be proved to exist. Classifiability Theorem (Gurevich) Let P be a property of prefix vocabulary classes that is closed under subsets and under union: X P, Y X = Y P X, Y P = X Y P Then there is a finite list MIN of prefix vocabulary classes such that X P Y MIN : Y X

30 Why prefix-vocabulary classes? historical reasons simple, syntactically defined classes a finite classification can a priori be proved to exist. Classifiability Theorem (Gurevich) Let P be a property of prefix vocabulary classes that is closed under subsets and under union: X P, Y X = Y P X, Y P = X Y P Then there is a finite list MIN of prefix vocabulary classes such that Take P = {X : Sat(X) decidable}. X P Y MIN : Y X = there is a finite list of minimal undecidable prefix-vocabulary classes.

31 Why prefix-vocabulary classes? historical reasons simple, syntactically defined classes a finite classification can a priori be proved to exist.

32 Why prefix-vocabulary classes? historical reasons simple, syntactically defined classes a finite classification can a priori be proved to exist. Good question!

33 Why prefix-vocabulary classes? historical reasons simple, syntactically defined classes a finite classification can a priori be proved to exist. Good question! Modern applications of logic in computer science often lead to quite different classes. For instance: modal logics, two-variable logics, guarded logics. On the other side the restriction to first-order logic is often too restrictive. Consider instead (fragments of) fixed point logics

34 ML: propositional modal logic Transition systems = Kripke structures = labeled graphs K = ( V, (E a ) a A, (P i ) i I ) states elements actions binary relations atomic propositions unary relations Syntax of ML: ψ ::= P i P i ψ ψ ψ ψ a ψ [a]ψ Example: P 1 a (P 2 [b]p 1 ) Semantics: [[ψ]] K = {v : K, v = ψ} = {v : ψ holds at state v in K}. K, v = a ψ [a]ψ : K, w = ψ for some all w with (v, w) E a

35 ML as a fragment of first-order logic There is standard translation, taking every ψ ML to a formula ψ (x) FO such that K, v = ψ K = ψ (v) P i P i x a ψ y(e a xy ψ (y)) [a]ψ y(e a xy ψ (y))

36 Properties of modal logic Good algorithmic properties: - Sat(ML) is decidable and PSPACE-complete - efficient model checking: time O( ψ K ) - automata-based algorithms

37 Properties of modal logic Good algorithmic properties: - Sat(ML) is decidable and PSPACE-complete - efficient model checking: time O( ψ K ) - automata-based algorithms Interesting model-theoretic properties: - invariance under bisimulation: K, v = ψ, K, v K, v = K, v = ψ in fact ML is the bisimulation-invariant fragment of first-order logic - ML has the tree model property - ML has the finite model property -...

38 Limitations of propositional modal logic ML has very limited expressive power - no equality - no unbounded quantification - no possibility to define new transition relations, not even on the quantifier-free level - no counting mechanism - no recursion mechanism: reachability problems, game problems, etc. are not expressible

39 Limitations of propositional modal logic ML has very limited expressive power - no equality - no unbounded quantification - no possibility to define new transition relations, not even on the quantifier-free level - no counting mechanism - no recursion mechanism: reachability problems, game problems, etc. are not expressible Note: The absence of a recursion mechanism is also a limitation of FO For numerous applications, in particular for reasoning about computation, reachability problems and game problems are essential. = numerous logics that extend ML by recursion mechanisms

40 Computation tree logic CTL ML + path quantification + temporal operators on paths CTL is a very important logic for hardware verification. Good balance between expressive power and algorithmic manageability A P U Q ( paths) (P until Q)

41 Computation tree logic CTL ML + path quantification + temporal operators on paths CTL is a very important logic for hardware verification. Good balance between expressive power and algorithmic manageability A P U Q ( paths) (P until Q) E G P ( path) always P A F P ( paths) eventually P

42 Computation tree logic CTL ML + path quantification + temporal operators on paths CTL is a very important logic for hardware verification. Good balance between expressive power and algorithmic manageability A P U Q ( paths) (P until Q) E G P ( path) always P A F P ( paths) eventually P A G A F P ( paths) always ( paths) eventually P ( paths) infinitely often P

43 L µ : modal µ-calculus ML + least and greatest fixed points For any definable monotone relational operator F φ : X {w : φ(x) true at w} make also the least and the greatest fixed point of F φ definable: K, w = µx.φ w {X : F φ (X) = X} (least fixed point) K, w = νx.φ w {X : F φ (X) = X} (greatest fixed point)

44 L µ : Examples K, w = νx. a X there is an infinite a-path from w in K K, w = µx. P [a]x every infinite a-path from w eventually hits P

45 L µ : Examples K, w = νx. a X there is an infinite a-path from w in K K, w = µx. P [a]x every infinite a-path from w eventually hits P Two player game on graph G = (V, E). Players alternate, moves along edges, who cannot move, loses. Player 0 has winning strategy for game G from position w G, w = µx. X

46 L µ : Examples K, w = νx. a X there is an infinite a-path from w in K K, w = µx. P [a]x every infinite a-path from w eventually hits P Two player game on graph G = (V, E). Players alternate, moves along edges, who cannot move, loses. Player 0 has winning strategy for game G from position w G, w = µx. X K, w = νx µy. ((P X) Y) on some path from w, P occurs infinitely often

47 Importance of CTL and modal µ-calculus ML CTL L µ µ-calculus encompasses most of the popular logics used in hardware verification: LTL, CTL, CTL, PDL,..., and also many logics from other fields: game logic, description logics, etc. reasonably good algorithmic properties: - satisfiability problem decidable (EXPTIME-complete) - efficient model checking for CTL and other important fragments of µ-calculus - automata-based algorithms nice model-theoretic properties: - finite model property - tree model property L µ is the bisimulation-invariant fragment of MSO

48 Summery: properties of modal logics The basic modal logic ML has good algorithmic and model-theoretic properties, but for most applications in computer science, it is not expressive enough

49 Summery: properties of modal logics The basic modal logic ML has good algorithmic and model-theoretic properties, but for most applications in computer science, it is not expressive enough There are numerous modal logics, that extend ML by recursion mechanisms and other features. These extensions are practically important because the provide the necessary expressive power for applications, while preserving the good algorithmic properties. Of particular importance for theoretical studies: modal µ-calculus (modal fixed point logic)

50 Summery: properties of modal logics The basic modal logic ML has good algorithmic and model-theoretic properties, but for most applications in computer science, it is not expressive enough There are numerous modal logics, that extend ML by recursion mechanisms and other features. These extensions are practically important because the provide the necessary expressive power for applications, while preserving the good algorithmic properties. Of particular importance for theoretical studies: modal µ-calculus (modal fixed point logic) Question. (Vardi 96) Why have modal logics so robust decidability properties?

51 Bounded variable logics FO k : relational first-order logic with only k variables

52 Bounded variable logics FO k : relational first-order logic with only k variables we may re-use variables: there is a path of length 17 FO 2 x y(exy x(eyx y(exy yexy ) )))

53 Bounded variable logics FO k : relational first-order logic with only k variables we may re-use variables: there is a path of length 17 FO 2 x y(exy x(eyx y(exy yexy ) ))) Note: instead of the number of variables, we can restrict the width width(ψ): maximal number of free variables in subformulae of ψ Proposition. FO k {ψ FO : width(ψ) k} Proposition. Sat(FO k ) is undecidable for all k 3 indeed, even the -prefix class is undecidable Question: What about FO 2?

54 Decidability of FO 2 Theorem (Mortimer 75) FO 2 has the finite model property. Mortimer s proof implies: every satisfiable ψ FO 2 has a model with at most 2 2O( ψ ) elements. = Sat(FO 2 ) 2-NEXPTIME

55 Decidability of FO 2 Theorem (Mortimer 75) FO 2 has the finite model property. Mortimer s proof implies: every satisfiable ψ FO 2 has a model with at most 2 2O( ψ ) elements. = Sat(FO 2 ) 2-NEXPTIME Theorem (Lewis 80, Fürer 84) Sat(FO 2 ) is NEXPTIME-hard. holds even for sentences of form x y α x y β (α and β quantifier-free), with only monadic predicates

56 Decidability of FO 2 Theorem (Mortimer 75) FO 2 has the finite model property. Mortimer s proof implies: every satisfiable ψ FO 2 has a model with at most 2 2O( ψ ) elements. = Sat(FO 2 ) 2-NEXPTIME Theorem (Lewis 80, Fürer 84) Sat(FO 2 ) is NEXPTIME-hard. holds even for sentences of form x y α x y β (α and β quantifier-free), with only monadic predicates Theorem (Grädel, Kolaitis, Vardi 97) Every satisfiable ψ FO 2 has a model with at most 2 O( ψ ) elements. Corollary Sat(FO 2 ) is NEXPTIME-complete

57 Modal logic and two-variable logic ML is a fragment of FO 2. The standard translation, taking ψ ML to ψ (x) FO does not need more than two variables: P i P i x a ψ y(e a xy ψ (y)) [a]ψ y(e a xy ψ (y))

58 Modal logic and two-variable logic ML is a fragment of FO 2. The standard translation, taking ψ ML to ψ (x) FO does not need more than two variables: P i P i x a ψ y(e a xy ψ (y)) [a]ψ y(e a xy ψ (y)) Traditionally the embedding into two-variable logic has been used as an explanation for the good algorithmic properties of modal logics. Is this explanation convincing?

59 Modal logic and two-variable logic ML is a fragment of FO 2. The standard translation, taking ψ ML to ψ (x) FO does not need more than two variables: P i P i x a ψ y(e a xy ψ (y)) [a]ψ y(e a xy ψ (y)) Traditionally the embedding into two-variable logic has been used as an explanation for the good algorithmic properties of modal logics. Is this explanation convincing? Answer: No!!!

60 Stronger two-variable logics Challenge: Extend FO 2 in a similar way, as CTL and µ-calculus extend propositional modal logic. Are the resulting logics still decidable? FO 2?? ML CTL L µ

61 Stronger two-variable logics TC 2 = FO 2 + transitive closures (TC φ)(x, y) CL 2 = least common natural extension of CTL and FO 2 FO 2 + β(x, y) φ + [β(x, y)] φ LFP 2 = FO 2 monadic least and greatest fixed points [lfp Tx. φ(t, x)](x) Theorem. (Grädel, Otto, Rosen) Sat(TC 2 ), Sat(CL 2 ), and Sat(LFP 2 ) are highly undecidable (Σ 1 1-hard).

62 Two-variable logics FO 2 CL 2 LFP 2 TC 2. ML CTL L µ Two-variable logics do not have the robust decidability properties of modal logics. Is there another explanation?

63 The guarded fragment of first-order logic (GF) Fragment of first-order logic with only guarded quantification y(α(x, y) φ(x, y)) y(α(x, y) φ(x, y)) with guards α : atomic formulae containing all free variables of φ

64 The guarded fragment of first-order logic (GF) Fragment of first-order logic with only guarded quantification y(α(x, y) φ(x, y)) y(α(x, y) φ(x, y)) with guards α : atomic formulae containing all free variables of φ Generalizes modal quantification: ML GF FO a φ y(e a xy φ(y)) [a]φ y(e a xy φ(y))

65 Model-theoretic and algorithmic properties of GF Satisfiability for GF is decidable (Andréka, van Benthem, Németi) GF has finite model property (Andréka, Hodkinson, Németi; Grädel) GF has (generalized) tree model property: every satisfiable formula has model of small tree width Sat(GF) is 2EXPTIME-complete and EXPTIME-complete for formulae of bounded width (Grädel) (Grädel) Guarded logics have small model checking games: G(A, ψ) = O( ψ A ) = efficient game-based model checking algorithms GF is invariant under guarded bisimulation

66 A thesis and a challenge Thesis: (Andréka, van Benthem, Németi) The guarded nature of quantification in modal logics is the real reason for their good algorithmic and model-theoretic properties.

67 A thesis and a challenge Thesis: (Andréka, van Benthem, Németi) The guarded nature of quantification in modal logics is the real reason for their good algorithmic and model-theoretic properties. Results on GF provide some evidence for this thesis. Real test: algorithmic properties of stronger guarded logics than GF. Challenge: Extend GF in a similar way, as µ-calculus extends ML. Is the resulting guarded fixed-point logic still decidable? L µ? LFP ML GF FO

68 A thesis and a challenge Thesis: (Andréka, van Benthem, Németi) The guarded nature of quantification in modal logics is the real reason for their good algorithmic and model-theoretic properties. Results on GF provide some evidence for this thesis. Real test: algorithmic properties of stronger guarded logics than GF. Challenge: Extend GF in a similar way, as µ-calculus extends ML. Is the resulting guarded fixed-point logic still decidable? L µ µgf LFP ML GF FO

69 Guarded fixed-point logic µgf = GF + least and greatest fixed points

70 Guarded fixed-point logic µgf = GF + least and greatest fixed points For every formula ψ(t, x 1... x k ), where T is a k-ary relation variable, occuring only positive in ψ, build formulae [lfp Tx. ψ](x) and [gfp Tx. ψ](x)

71 Guarded fixed-point logic µgf = GF + least and greatest fixed points For every formula ψ(t, x 1... x k ), where T is a k-ary relation variable, occuring only positive in ψ, build formulae [lfp Tx. ψ](x) and [gfp Tx. ψ](x) On every structure A, ψ(t, x) defines monotone operator ψ A : P(A k ) P(A k ) T {a : (A, T) = ψ(t, a)} ψ A has a least fixed point lfp(ψ A ) and a greatest fixed point gfp(ψ A ) A = [lfp Tx. ψ(t, x)](a) : a lfp(ψ A ) A = [gfp Tx. ψ(t, x)](a) : a gfp(ψ A )

72 Guarded fixed point logic Example. ψ := xyfxy ( xy. Fxy) zfyz ( xy. Fxy) [lfp Wy. ( x. Fxy)Wx] } {{ } (y) {y : there is no infinite chain y y 1 y 2 } ψ is satisfiable: (ω, <) = ψ ψ has no finite models Proposition. µgf does not have the finite model property.

73 Decidability of guarded fixed point logic Theorem. (Grädel, Walukiewicz) Sat(µGF) 2-EXPTIME-complete, and EXPTIME-complete for formulae of bounded width. same complexity bounds as for GF: no penalty for fixed points! Proof. Relies on generalized tree model property: Every satisfiable ψ µgf has a model of small tree width Reduction of Sat(µGF) to emptiness problem for certain automata (alternating two-way tree automata with parity acceptance condition).

74 Final remarks The world of guarded logics is much richer than shown in this talk: - more liberal guardedness conditions: loosely guarded, clique guarded, action guarded, packed logics - guarded fragments of other logics, e.g. GSO, Datalog LITE,...

75 Final remarks The world of guarded logics is much richer than shown in this talk: - more liberal guardedness conditions: loosely guarded, clique guarded, action guarded, packed logics - guarded fragments of other logics, e.g. GSO, Datalog LITE,... While modal logics talk only about graphs, guarded logics are applicable to arbitrary relational structures. Many of the mathematical tools used for analysing modal logics have their counterpart in the world of guarded logics: bisimulation, automata,...

76 Final remarks The world of guarded logics is much richer than shown in this talk: - more liberal guardedness conditions: loosely guarded, clique guarded, action guarded, packed logics - guarded fragments of other logics, e.g. GSO, Datalog LITE,... While modal logics talk only about graphs, guarded logics are applicable to arbitrary relational structures. Many of the mathematical tools used for analysing modal logics have their counterpart in the world of guarded logics: bisimulation, automata,... Conclusion. Guarded logics provide a general and versatile family of logical systems that generalise, and to a large extent explain the good algorithmic and model-theoretic properties of modal logics.

### Fixed-Point Logics and Computation

1 Fixed-Point Logics and Computation Symposium on the Unusual Effectiveness of Logic in Computer Science University of Cambridge 2 Mathematical Logic Mathematical logic seeks to formalise the process of

### Guarded Negation. Balder ten Cate (UC Santa Cruz) Stanford Logic Seminar 10/2/12

Guarded Negation Balder ten Cate (UC Santa Cruz) Stanford Logic Seminar 10/2/12 Based on joint work with Luc Segoufin, Vince Barany, and Martin Otto (STACS 11, ICALP 11, VLDB 12) Decidable Fragments Decidable

### Constraint Satisfaction Problems and Descriptive Complexity

1 Constraint Satisfaction Problems and Descriptive Complexity Anuj Dawar University of Cambridge AIM workshop on Universal Algebra, Logic and CSP 1 April 2008 2 Descriptive Complexity Descriptive Complexity

### Theory of Computing Systems 2004 Springer Science+Business Media, Inc.

Theory Comput. Systems OF1 OF20 (2004) DOI: 10.1007/s00224-004-1147-5 Theory of Computing Systems 2004 Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. Fixed-Point Logics and Solitaire Games Dietmar Berwanger and

### Algorithmic Software Verification

Algorithmic Software Verification (LTL Model Checking) Azadeh Farzan What is Verification Anyway? Proving (in a formal way) that program satisfies a specification written in a logical language. Formal

### First-Order Logics and Truth Degrees

First-Order Logics and Truth Degrees George Metcalfe Mathematics Institute University of Bern LATD 2014, Vienna Summer of Logic, 15-19 July 2014 George Metcalfe (University of Bern) First-Order Logics

### Path Querying on Graph Databases

Path Querying on Graph Databases Jelle Hellings Hasselt University and transnational University of Limburg 1/38 Overview Graph Databases Motivation Walk Logic Relations with FO and MSO Relations with CTL

### ON FUNCTIONAL SYMBOL-FREE LOGIC PROGRAMS

PROCEEDINGS OF THE YEREVAN STATE UNIVERSITY Physical and Mathematical Sciences 2012 1 p. 43 48 ON FUNCTIONAL SYMBOL-FREE LOGIC PROGRAMS I nf or m at i cs L. A. HAYKAZYAN * Chair of Programming and Information

### CHAPTER 7 GENERAL PROOF SYSTEMS

CHAPTER 7 GENERAL PROOF SYSTEMS 1 Introduction Proof systems are built to prove statements. They can be thought as an inference machine with special statements, called provable statements, or sometimes

### Undecidable First-Order Theories of Affine Geometries

Undecidable First-Order Theories of Affine Geometries Antti Kuusisto University of Tampere Joint work with Jeremy Meyers (Stanford University) and Jonni Virtema (University of Tampere) Tarski s Geometry

### Summary Last Lecture. Automated Reasoning. Outline of the Lecture. Definition sequent calculus. Theorem (Normalisation and Strong Normalisation)

Summary Summary Last Lecture sequent calculus Automated Reasoning Georg Moser Institute of Computer Science @ UIBK Winter 013 (Normalisation and Strong Normalisation) let Π be a proof in minimal logic

### MATHEMATICS: CONCEPTS, AND FOUNDATIONS Vol. III - Logic and Computer Science - Phokion G. Kolaitis

LOGIC AND COMPUTER SCIENCE Phokion G. Kolaitis Computer Science Department, University of California, Santa Cruz, CA 95064, USA Keywords: algorithm, Armstrong s axioms, complete problem, complexity class,

### o-minimality and Uniformity in n 1 Graphs

o-minimality and Uniformity in n 1 Graphs Reid Dale July 10, 2013 Contents 1 Introduction 2 2 Languages and Structures 2 3 Definability and Tame Geometry 4 4 Applications to n 1 Graphs 6 5 Further Directions

### Software Modeling and Verification

Software Modeling and Verification Alessandro Aldini DiSBeF - Sezione STI University of Urbino Carlo Bo Italy 3-4 February 2015 Algorithmic verification Correctness problem Is the software/hardware system

### Algebraic Recognizability of Languages

of Languages LaBRI, Université Bordeaux-1 and CNRS MFCS Conference, Prague, August 2004 The general problem Problem: to specify and analyse infinite sets by finite means The general problem Problem: to

### Description Logics for Conceptual Data Modeling in UML

Description Logics for Conceptual Data Modeling in UML Diego Calvanese, Giuseppe De Giacomo Dipartimento di Informatica e Sistemistica Università di Roma La Sapienza ESSLLI 2003 Vienna, August 18 22, 2003

### CODING TRUE ARITHMETIC IN THE MEDVEDEV AND MUCHNIK DEGREES

CODING TRUE ARITHMETIC IN THE MEDVEDEV AND MUCHNIK DEGREES PAUL SHAFER Abstract. We prove that the first-order theory of the Medvedev degrees, the first-order theory of the Muchnik degrees, and the third-order

### A Propositional Dynamic Logic for CCS Programs

A Propositional Dynamic Logic for CCS Programs Mario R. F. Benevides and L. Menasché Schechter {mario,luis}@cos.ufrj.br Abstract This work presents a Propositional Dynamic Logic in which the programs are

### Formal Verification and Linear-time Model Checking

Formal Verification and Linear-time Model Checking Paul Jackson University of Edinburgh Automated Reasoning 21st and 24th October 2013 Why Automated Reasoning? Intellectually stimulating and challenging

### Model Checking II Temporal Logic Model Checking

1/32 Model Checking II Temporal Logic Model Checking Edmund M Clarke, Jr School of Computer Science Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA 15213 2/32 Temporal Logic Model Checking Specification Language:

### (LMCS, p. 317) V.1. First Order Logic. This is the most powerful, most expressive logic that we will examine.

(LMCS, p. 317) V.1 First Order Logic This is the most powerful, most expressive logic that we will examine. Our version of first-order logic will use the following symbols: variables connectives (,,,,

### Scalable Automated Symbolic Analysis of Administrative Role-Based Access Control Policies by SMT solving

Scalable Automated Symbolic Analysis of Administrative Role-Based Access Control Policies by SMT solving Alessandro Armando 1,2 and Silvio Ranise 2, 1 DIST, Università degli Studi di Genova, Italia 2 Security

### Elements of Finite Model Theory

Leonid Libkin Elements of Finite Model Theory With 24 Figures February 7, 2012 Springer Berlin Heidelberg NewYork Hong Kong London Milan Paris Tokyo To Helen, Daniel, and Victoria Preface Finite model

### Temporal Logics. Computation Tree Logic

Temporal Logics CTL: definition, relationship between operators, adequate sets, specifying properties, safety/liveness/fairness Modeling: sequential, concurrent systems; maximum parallelism/interleaving

### Theory of Automated Reasoning An Introduction. Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho

Theory of Automated Reasoning An Introduction Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho Intended as compulsory reading for the Spring 2004 course on Automated Reasononing at Department of Mathematical Information Technology,

### Testing LTL Formula Translation into Büchi Automata

Testing LTL Formula Translation into Büchi Automata Heikki Tauriainen and Keijo Heljanko Helsinki University of Technology, Laboratory for Theoretical Computer Science, P. O. Box 5400, FIN-02015 HUT, Finland

### Computational Logic and Cognitive Science: An Overview

Computational Logic and Cognitive Science: An Overview Session 1: Logical Foundations Technical University of Dresden 25th of August, 2008 University of Osnabrück Who we are Helmar Gust Interests: Analogical

### DEFINABLE TYPES IN PRESBURGER ARITHMETIC

DEFINABLE TYPES IN PRESBURGER ARITHMETIC GABRIEL CONANT Abstract. We consider the first order theory of (Z, +,

### Software Verification and Testing. Lecture Notes: Temporal Logics

Software Verification and Testing Lecture Notes: Temporal Logics Motivation traditional programs (whether terminating or non-terminating) can be modelled as relations are analysed wrt their input/output

### A first step towards modeling semistructured data in hybrid multimodal logic

A first step towards modeling semistructured data in hybrid multimodal logic Nicole Bidoit * Serenella Cerrito ** Virginie Thion * * LRI UMR CNRS 8623, Université Paris 11, Centre d Orsay. ** LaMI UMR

### Composing Schema Mappings: Second-Order Dependencies to the Rescue

Composing Schema Mappings: Second-Order Dependencies to the Rescue Ronald Fagin IBM Almaden Research Center fagin@almaden.ibm.com Phokion G. Kolaitis UC Santa Cruz kolaitis@cs.ucsc.edu Wang-Chiew Tan UC

### Finite variable logics

Finite variable logics Ian Hodkinson Department of Computing Imperial College 180 Queen s Gate, London SW7 2BZ, England. Email: imh@doc.ic.ac.uk Abstract In this survey article we discuss some aspects

### logic language, static/dynamic models SAT solvers Verified Software Systems 1 How can we model check of a program or system?

5. LTL, CTL Last part: Alloy logic language, static/dynamic models SAT solvers Today: Temporal Logic (LTL, CTL) Verified Software Systems 1 Overview How can we model check of a program or system? Modeling

### Goal of the Talk Theorem The class of languages recognisable by T -coalgebra automata is closed under taking complements.

Complementation of Coalgebra Automata Christian Kissig (University of Leicester) joint work with Yde Venema (Universiteit van Amsterdam) 07 Sept 2009 / Universitá degli Studi di Udine / CALCO 2009 Goal

### Composing Schema Mappings: An Overview

Composing Schema Mappings: An Overview Phokion G. Kolaitis UC Santa Scruz & IBM Almaden Joint work with Ronald Fagin, Lucian Popa, and Wang-Chiew Tan The Data Interoperability Challenge Data may reside

### http://aejm.ca Journal of Mathematics http://rema.ca Volume 1, Number 1, Summer 2006 pp. 69 86

Atlantic Electronic http://aejm.ca Journal of Mathematics http://rema.ca Volume 1, Number 1, Summer 2006 pp. 69 86 AUTOMATED RECOGNITION OF STUTTER INVARIANCE OF LTL FORMULAS Jeffrey Dallien 1 and Wendy

### Continuous fragment of the µ-calculus

Continuous fragment of the µ-calculus Gaëlle Fontaine Institute for Logic, Language and Computation, Plantage Muidergracht 24, 1018 TV Amsterdam, The Netherlands gfontain@science.uva.nl http://staff.science.uva.nl/~gfontain

### Universität Stuttgart Fakultät Informatik, Elektrotechnik und Informationstechnik

Universität Stuttgart Fakultät Informatik, Elektrotechnik und Informationstechnik Infinite State Model-Checking of Propositional Dynamic Logics Stefan Göller and Markus Lohrey Report Nr. 2006/04 Institut

### CS Master Level Courses and Areas COURSE DESCRIPTIONS. CSCI 521 Real-Time Systems. CSCI 522 High Performance Computing

CS Master Level Courses and Areas The graduate courses offered may change over time, in response to new developments in computer science and the interests of faculty and students; the list of graduate

### Validity Checking. Propositional and First-Order Logic (part I: semantic methods)

Validity Checking Propositional and First-Order Logic (part I: semantic methods) Slides based on the book: Rigorous Software Development: an introduction to program verification, by José Bacelar Almeida,

### Introduction to Software Verification

Introduction to Software Verification Orna Grumberg Lectures Material winter 2013-14 Lecture 4 5.11.13 Model Checking Automated formal verification: A different approach to formal verification Model Checking

### Foundations of mathematics

Foundations of mathematics 1. First foundations of mathematics 1.1. Introduction to the foundations of mathematics Mathematics, theories and foundations Sylvain Poirier http://settheory.net/ Mathematics

### Development of dynamically evolving and self-adaptive software. 1. Background

Development of dynamically evolving and self-adaptive software 1. Background LASER 2013 Isola d Elba, September 2013 Carlo Ghezzi Politecnico di Milano Deep-SE Group @ DEIB 1 Requirements Functional requirements

### Schedule. Logic (master program) Literature & Online Material. gic. Time and Place. Literature. Exercises & Exam. Online Material

OLC mputational gic Schedule Time and Place Thursday, 8:15 9:45, HS E Logic (master program) Georg Moser Institute of Computer Science @ UIBK week 1 October 2 week 8 November 20 week 2 October 9 week 9

### SJÄLVSTÄNDIGA ARBETEN I MATEMATIK

SJÄLVSTÄNDIGA ARBETEN I MATEMATIK MATEMATISKA INSTITUTIONEN, STOCKHOLMS UNIVERSITET Automated Theorem Proving av Tom Everitt 2010 - No 8 MATEMATISKA INSTITUTIONEN, STOCKHOLMS UNIVERSITET, 106 91 STOCKHOLM

### Degrees of Truth: the formal logic of classical and quantum probabilities as well as fuzzy sets.

Degrees of Truth: the formal logic of classical and quantum probabilities as well as fuzzy sets. Logic is the study of reasoning. A language of propositions is fundamental to this study as well as true

### Bounded Treewidth in Knowledge Representation and Reasoning 1

Bounded Treewidth in Knowledge Representation and Reasoning 1 Reinhard Pichler Institut für Informationssysteme Arbeitsbereich DBAI Technische Universität Wien Luminy, October 2010 1 Joint work with G.

### Static analysis of parity games: alternating reachability under parity

8 January 2016, DTU Denmark Static analysis of parity games: alternating reachability under parity Michael Huth, Imperial College London Nir Piterman, University of Leicester Jim Huan-Pu Kuo, Imperial

### Model Checking: An Introduction

Announcements Model Checking: An Introduction Meeting 2 Office hours M 1:30pm-2:30pm W 5:30pm-6:30pm (after class) and by appointment ECOT 621 Moodle problems? Fundamentals of Programming Languages CSCI

### Which Semantics for Neighbourhood Semantics?

Which Semantics for Neighbourhood Semantics? Carlos Areces INRIA Nancy, Grand Est, France Diego Figueira INRIA, LSV, ENS Cachan, France Abstract In this article we discuss two alternative proposals for

### A CTL-Based Logic for Program Abstractions

A CTL-Based Logic for Program Abstractions Martin Lange 1 and Markus Latte 2 1 Dept. of Computer Science, University of Kassel, Germany 2 Dept. of Computer Science, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich,

### DECISION PROBLEMS OVER INFINITE GRAPHS HIGHER-ORDER PUSHDOWN SYSTEMS AND SYNCHRONIZED PRODUCTS

DECISION PROBLEMS OVER INFINITE GRAPHS HIGHER-ORDER PUSHDOWN SYSTEMS AND SYNCHRONIZED PRODUCTS Von der Fakultät für Mathematik, Informatik und Naturwissenschaften der Rheinisch-Westfälischen Technischen

### Monitoring Metric First-order Temporal Properties

Monitoring Metric First-order Temporal Properties DAVID BASIN, FELIX KLAEDTKE, SAMUEL MÜLLER, and EUGEN ZĂLINESCU, ETH Zurich Runtime monitoring is a general approach to verifying system properties at

### On the Modeling and Verification of Security-Aware and Process-Aware Information Systems

On the Modeling and Verification of Security-Aware and Process-Aware Information Systems 29 August 2011 What are workflows to us? Plans or schedules that map users or resources to tasks Such mappings may

### This asserts two sets are equal iff they have the same elements, that is, a set is determined by its elements.

3. Axioms of Set theory Before presenting the axioms of set theory, we first make a few basic comments about the relevant first order logic. We will give a somewhat more detailed discussion later, but

### Model checking test models. Author: Kevin de Berk Supervisors: Prof. dr. Wan Fokkink, dr. ir. Machiel van der Bijl

Model checking test models Author: Kevin de Berk Supervisors: Prof. dr. Wan Fokkink, dr. ir. Machiel van der Bijl February 14, 2014 Abstract This thesis is about model checking testing models. These testing

### Introducing Formal Methods. Software Engineering and Formal Methods

Introducing Formal Methods Formal Methods for Software Specification and Analysis: An Overview 1 Software Engineering and Formal Methods Every Software engineering methodology is based on a recommended

### Automated Theorem Proving - summary of lecture 1

Automated Theorem Proving - summary of lecture 1 1 Introduction Automated Theorem Proving (ATP) deals with the development of computer programs that show that some statement is a logical consequence of

### Global Properties of the Turing Degrees and the Turing Jump

Global Properties of the Turing Degrees and the Turing Jump Theodore A. Slaman Department of Mathematics University of California, Berkeley Berkeley, CA 94720-3840, USA slaman@math.berkeley.edu Abstract

### Foundational Proof Certificates

An application of proof theory to computer science INRIA-Saclay & LIX, École Polytechnique CUSO Winter School, Proof and Computation 30 January 2013 Can we standardize, communicate, and trust formal proofs?

### Static Program Transformations for Efficient Software Model Checking

Static Program Transformations for Efficient Software Model Checking Shobha Vasudevan Jacob Abraham The University of Texas at Austin Dependable Systems Large and complex systems Software faults are major

### Syntax and Semantics for Business Rules

Syntax and Semantics for Business Rules Xiaofan Liu 1 2, Natasha Alechina 1, and Brian Logan 1 1 School of Computer Science, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG8 1BB, UK 2 School of Computer and Communication,

### Space and Circuit Complexity of Monadic Second-Order Definable Problems on Tree-Decomposable Structures. Michael Elberfeld

Space and Circuit Complexity of Monadic Second-Order Definable Problems on Tree-Decomposable Structures Michael Elberfeld From the Institute of Theoretical Computer Science of the University of Lübeck

### The Model Checker SPIN

The Model Checker SPIN Author: Gerard J. Holzmann Presented By: Maulik Patel Outline Introduction Structure Foundation Algorithms Memory management Example/Demo SPIN-Introduction Introduction SPIN (Simple(

### EQUATIONAL LOGIC AND ABSTRACT ALGEBRA * ABSTRACT

EQUATIONAL LOGIC AND ABSTRACT ALGEBRA * Taje I. Ramsamujh Florida International University Mathematics Department ABSTRACT Equational logic is a formalization of the deductive methods encountered in studying

### Specification and Analysis of Contracts Lecture 1 Introduction

Specification and Analysis of Contracts Lecture 1 Introduction Gerardo Schneider gerardo@ifi.uio.no http://folk.uio.no/gerardo/ Department of Informatics, University of Oslo SEFM School, Oct. 27 - Nov.

### Certain Answers as Objects and Knowledge

Certain Answers as Objects and Knowledge Leonid Libkin School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh Abstract The standard way of answering queries over incomplete databases is to compute certain answers,

### Aikaterini Marazopoulou

Imperial College London Department of Computing Tableau Compiled Labelled Deductive Systems with an application to Description Logics by Aikaterini Marazopoulou Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements

### Non-deterministic Semantics and the Undecidability of Boolean BI

1 Non-deterministic Semantics and the Undecidability of Boolean BI DOMINIQUE LARCHEY-WENDLING, LORIA CNRS, Nancy, France DIDIER GALMICHE, LORIA Université Henri Poincaré, Nancy, France We solve the open

### Truth as Modality. Amsterdam Workshop on Truth 13 March 2013 truth be told again. Theodora Achourioti. ILLC University of Amsterdam

Truth as Modality Amsterdam Workshop on Truth 13 March 2013 truth be told again Theodora Achourioti ILLC University of Amsterdam Philosophical preliminaries i The philosophical idea: There is more to truth

### Turing Degrees and Definability of the Jump. Theodore A. Slaman. University of California, Berkeley. CJuly, 2005

Turing Degrees and Definability of the Jump Theodore A. Slaman University of California, Berkeley CJuly, 2005 Outline Lecture 1 Forcing in arithmetic Coding and decoding theorems Automorphisms of countable

### Reading 13 : Finite State Automata and Regular Expressions

CS/Math 24: Introduction to Discrete Mathematics Fall 25 Reading 3 : Finite State Automata and Regular Expressions Instructors: Beck Hasti, Gautam Prakriya In this reading we study a mathematical model

### Section 2.6 Cantor s Theorem and the ZFC Axioms

1 Section 2.6 and the ZFC Axioms Purpose of Section: To state and prove Cantor theorem, which guarantees the existence of infinities larger than the cardinality of the continuum. We also state and discuss

### x < y iff x < y, or x and y are incomparable and x χ(x,y) < y χ(x,y).

12. Large cardinals The study, or use, of large cardinals is one of the most active areas of research in set theory currently. There are many provably different kinds of large cardinals whose descriptions

### Rigorous Software Development CSCI-GA 3033-009

Rigorous Software Development CSCI-GA 3033-009 Instructor: Thomas Wies Spring 2013 Lecture 11 Semantics of Programming Languages Denotational Semantics Meaning of a program is defined as the mathematical

### Functional Programming. Functional Programming Languages. Chapter 14. Introduction

Functional Programming Languages Chapter 14 Introduction Functional programming paradigm History Features and concepts Examples: Lisp ML 1 2 Functional Programming Functional Programming Languages The

### Treebank Search with Tree Automata MonaSearch Querying Linguistic Treebanks with Monadic Second Order Logic

Treebank Search with Tree Automata MonaSearch Querying Linguistic Treebanks with Monadic Second Order Logic Authors: H. Maryns, S. Kepser Speaker: Stephanie Ehrbächer July, 31th Treebank Search with Tree

### Automatic Verification of Data-Centric Business Processes

Automatic Verification of Data-Centric Business Processes Alin Deutsch UC San Diego Richard Hull IBM Yorktown Heights Fabio Patrizi Sapienza Univ. of Rome Victor Vianu UC San Diego Abstract We formalize

### Offline 1-Minesweeper is NP-complete

Offline 1-Minesweeper is NP-complete James D. Fix Brandon McPhail May 24 Abstract We use Minesweeper to illustrate NP-completeness proofs, arguments that establish the hardness of solving certain problems.

### Chapter 1. Informal introdution to the axioms of ZF.

Chapter 1. Informal introdution to the axioms of ZF. 1.1. Extension. Our conception of sets comes from set of objects that we know well such as N, Q and R, and subsets we can form from these determined

### SMALL SKEW FIELDS CÉDRIC MILLIET

SMALL SKEW FIELDS CÉDRIC MILLIET Abstract A division ring of positive characteristic with countably many pure types is a field Wedderburn showed in 1905 that finite fields are commutative As for infinite

### Automata-based Verification - I

CS3172: Advanced Algorithms Automata-based Verification - I Howard Barringer Room KB2.20: email: howard.barringer@manchester.ac.uk March 2006 Supporting and Background Material Copies of key slides (already

### Predicate Calculus. There are certain arguments that seem to be perfectly logical, yet they cannot be expressed by using propositional calculus.

Predicate Calculus (Alternative names: predicate logic, first order logic, elementary logic, restricted predicate calculus, restricted functional calculus, relational calculus, theory of quantification,

### Consistency, completeness of undecidable preposition of Principia Mathematica. Tanmay Jaipurkar

Consistency, completeness of undecidable preposition of Principia Mathematica Tanmay Jaipurkar October 21, 2013 Abstract The fallowing paper discusses the inconsistency and undecidable preposition of Principia

### Static Analysis of XML Processing with Data Values

Static Analysis of XML Processing with Data Values Luc Segoufin INRIA and Université Paris 11 http://www-rocq.inria.fr/~segoufin 1 Introduction Most theoretical work on static analysis for XML and its

### Parametric Domain-theoretic models of Linear Abadi & Plotkin Logic

Parametric Domain-theoretic models of Linear Abadi & Plotkin Logic Lars Birkedal Rasmus Ejlers Møgelberg Rasmus Lerchedahl Petersen IT University Technical Report Series TR-00-7 ISSN 600 600 February 00

### A Logic Approach for LTL System Modification

A Logic Approach for LTL System Modification Yulin Ding and Yan Zhang School of Computing & Information Technology University of Western Sydney Kingswood, N.S.W. 1797, Australia email: {yding,yan}@cit.uws.edu.au

### Ontologies and the Web Ontology Language OWL

Chapter 7 Ontologies and the Web Ontology Language OWL vocabularies can be defined by RDFS not so much stronger than the ER Model or UML (even weaker: no cardinalities) not only a conceptual model, but

### A Beginner s Guide to Modern Set Theory

A Beginner s Guide to Modern Set Theory Martin Dowd Product of Hyperon Software PO Box 4161 Costa Mesa, CA 92628 www.hyperonsoft.com Copyright c 2010 by Martin Dowd 1. Introduction..... 1 2. Formal logic......

### Materialization of Universal Turing Machines. Rainer Glaschick supporting Heinz-Nixdorf MuseumsForum Paderborn, Germany

Materialization of Universal Turing Machines Rainer Glaschick supporting Heinz-Nixdorf MuseumsForum Paderborn, Germany Contents Alan Turing's relation to Germany Turing Machines Hasenjaeger's Materializations

### AN INTUITIONISTIC EPISTEMIC LOGIC FOR ASYNCHRONOUS COMMUNICATION. Yoichi Hirai. A Master Thesis

AN INTUITIONISTIC EPISTEMIC LOGIC FOR ASYNCHRONOUS COMMUNICATION by Yoichi Hirai A Master Thesis Submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Tokyo on February 10, 2010 in Partial Fulfillment

### The Complexity of Description Logics with Concrete Domains

The Complexity of Description Logics with Concrete Domains Von der Fakultät für Mathematik, Informatik und Naturwissenschaften der Rheinisch-Westfälischen Technischen Hochschule Aachen zur Erlangung des

### On strong fairness in UNITY

On strong fairness in UNITY H.P.Gumm, D.Zhukov Fachbereich Mathematik und Informatik Philipps Universität Marburg {gumm,shukov}@mathematik.uni-marburg.de Abstract. In [6] Tsay and Bagrodia present a correct

### Computability Theory

CSC 438F/2404F Notes (S. Cook and T. Pitassi) Fall, 2014 Computability Theory This section is partly inspired by the material in A Course in Mathematical Logic by Bell and Machover, Chap 6, sections 1-10.

### The Course. http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~cs3153/

The Course http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~cs3153/ Lecturers Dr Peter Höfner NICTA L5 building Prof Rob van Glabbeek NICTA L5 building Dr Ralf Huuck NICTA ATP building 2 Plan/Schedule (1) Where and When Tuesday,

### Predicate Logic. M.A.Galán, TDBA64, VT-03

Predicate Logic 1 Introduction There are certain arguments that seem to be perfectly logical, yet they cannot be specified by using propositional logic. All cats have tails. Tom is a cat. From these two

### Semantics and Verification of Software

Semantics and Verification of Software Lecture 21: Nondeterminism and Parallelism IV (Equivalence of CCS Processes & Wrap-Up) Thomas Noll Lehrstuhl für Informatik 2 (Software Modeling and Verification)

### Tree-representation of set families and applications to combinatorial decompositions

Tree-representation of set families and applications to combinatorial decompositions Binh-Minh Bui-Xuan a, Michel Habib b Michaël Rao c a Department of Informatics, University of Bergen, Norway. buixuan@ii.uib.no