Logic and Branching Automata

We consider various extensions of first-order logic. Informally, a logic 𝓛 is an extension of first-order logic if every sentence of first-order logic is also a sentence of 𝓛. We also require that 𝓛 is closed under conjunction and negation and has other basic properties of a logic. In Section 9.4, we list the properties that formally define the notion of an extension of first-order logic. Prior to Section 9.4, we provide various natural examples of such extensions. In Sections 9.1–9.3, we consider, respectively, second-order logic, infinitary logics, and logics with fixed-point operators. We do not provide a thorough treatment of any one of these logics. Indeed, we could easily devote an entire chapter to each. Rather, we define each logic and provide examples that demonstrate the expressive power of the logics. In particular, we show that none of these logics has compactness. In the final Section 9.4, we prove that if a proper extension of first-order logic has compactness, then the Downward Löwenhiem–Skolem theorem must fail for that logic. This is Lindstrom’s theorem. The Compactness theorem and Downward Löwenheim–Skolem theorem are two crucial results for model theory. Every property of first-order logic from Chapter 4 is a consequence of these two theorems. Lindström’s theorem implies that the only extension of first-order logic possessing these properties is first-order logic itself. Second-order logic is the extension of first-order logic that allows quantification of relations. The symbols of second-order logic are the same symbols used in first-order logic. The syntax of second-order logic is defined by adding one rule to the syntax of first-order logic. The additional rule makes second-order logic far more expressive than first-order logic. Specifically, the syntax of second-order logic is defined as follows. Any atomic first-order formula is a formula of second-order logic. Moreover, we have the following four rules: (R1) If φ is a formula then so is ￢φ. (R2) If φ and ψ are formulas then so is φ ∧ ψ. (R3) If φ is a formula, then so is ∃x φ for any variable x.

Motivated by applications in software verification, we explore automated reasoning about the non-disjoint combination of theories of infinitely many finite structures, where the theories share set variables and set operations. We prove a combination theorem and apply it to show the decidability of the satisfiability problem for a class of formulas obtained by applying propositional connectives to formulas belonging to: 1) Boolean Algebra with Presburger Arithmetic (with quantifiers over sets and integers), 2) weak monadic second-order logic over trees (with monadic second-order quantifiers), 3) two-variable logic with counting quantifiers (ranging over elements), 4) the Bernays-Schonfinkel-Ramsey class of first-order logic with equality (with ∃*¬* quantifier prefix), and 5) the quantifier-free logic of multisets with cardinality constraints.

Every graph can be represented uniquely in a hierarchical way by means of its modular decomposition. We establish that the modular decomposition of a linearly ordered graph is definable in monadic second-order (MS) logic in the graph itself. The modular decomposition does not depend on the linear order of the given graph. A set of graphs is recognizable w.r.t. the operations associated with graph substitution iff it is definable by a formula of an extension of MS logic based on the use of auxilliary linear orderings. This paper is an extended abstract: complete proofs can be found in [7].

Comparator Circuits over Finite Bounded Posets

In this chapter we make a case for the monadic second-order logic (that is to say, for the extension of first-order logic allowing quantification over monadic predicates) as a good source of theories that are both expressive and manageable. We illustrate two powerful decidability techniques here. One makes use of automata and games. The other is an offshot of a composition theory where one composes models as well as their theories. Monadic second-order logic appears to be the most natural match for the composition theory. Undecidability proofs must be thought out anew in this area; for, whereas true first-order arithmetic is reducible to the monadic theory of the real line R, it is nevertheless not interpretable in the monadic theory of R. A quite unusual undecidability method is another subject of this chapter. In the last section we briefly review the history of the methods thus far developed and mention numerous results obtained by the methods.

Let P be a finite N-free poset. We consider the hypergraph H(P) whose vertices are the elements of P and whose edges are the maximal intervals of P. We study the dual König property of H(P) in two subclasses of N-free class.

We study the expressivity and the complexity of various logics in probabilistic team semantics with the Boolean negation. In particular, we study the extension of probabilistic independence logic with the Boolean negation, and a recently introduced logic first-order theory of random variables with probabilistic independence. We give several results that compare the expressivity of these logics with the most studied logics in probabilistic team semantics setting, as well as relating their expressivity to a numerical variant of second-order logic. In addition, we introduce novel entropy atoms and show that the extension of first-order logic by entropy atoms subsumes probabilistic independence logic. Finally, we obtain some results on the complexity of model checking, validity and satisfiability of our logics.

We study the language-theoretical aspects of parameterized communicating automata (PCAs), in which processes communicate via rendez-vous. A given PCA can be run on any topology of bounded degree such as pipelines, rings, ranked trees, and grids. We show that, under a context bound, which restricts the local behavior of each process, PCAs are effectively complementable. Complementability is considered a key aspect of robust automata models and can, in particular, be exploited for verification. In this paper, we use it to obtain a characterization of context-bounded PCAs in terms of monadic second-order (MSO) logic. As the emptiness problem for context-bounded PCAs is decidable for the classes of pipelines, rings, and trees, their model-checking problem wrt. MSO properties also becomes decidable. While previous work on model checking parameterized systems typically uses temporal logics without next operator, our MSO logic allows one to express several natural next modalities.

1 - Structures, Languages and Translations: the Structural Approach to Feature Logic

We consider monadic second order logic (MSO) and the modal μ-calculus (Lμ) over transition systems (Kripke structures). It is well known that every class of transition systems which is definable by a sentence of Lμ is definable by a sentence of MSO as well. It will be shown that the converse is also true for an important fragment of MSO: every class of transition systems which is MSO-definable and which is closed under bisimulation - i.e., the sentence does not distinguish between bisimilar models - is also Lμ-definable. Hence we obtain the following expressive completeness result: the bisimulation invariant fragment of MSO and Lμ are equivalent. The result was proved by David Janin and Igor Walukiewicz. Our presentation is based on their article [91]. The main step is the development of automata-based characterizations of Lμ over arbitrary transition systems and of MSO over transition trees (see also Chapter 16). It turns out that there is a general notion of automaton subsuming both characterizations, so we obtain a common ground to compare these two logics. Moreover we need the notion of the ω-unravelling for a transition system, on the one hand to obtain a bisimilar transition tree and on the other hand to increase the possibilities of choosing successors.

We consider graph decision problems on partial 3-trees that can be solved by a finite-state, leaf-to-root tree automaton processing a width-3 tree decomposition of the given graph. The class of yes-instances of such a problem is said to be recognizable by the tree automaton. In this paper we show that any such class of recognizable partial 3-trees is definable by a sentence in CMS logic. Here, CMS logic is the extension of Monadic Second-order logic with predicates to count the cardinality of sets modulo fixed integers. We also generalize this result to show that recognizability (by a tree automaton that processes width-k tree decompositions) implies CMS-definability for k -connected partial k -trees. The converse—definability implies recognizability—is known to hold for any class of partial k -trees, and even for any graph class with an appropriate definition of recognizability. It has been conjectured that recognizability implies definability over partial k -trees; but a proof was previously known only for k ≤ 2 . This paper proves the conjecture, and hence the equivalence of definability and recognizability, over partial 3-trees and k -connected partial k -trees. We use techniques that may lead to a proof of this equivalence over all partial k -trees.

While plural logic can be interpreted in monadic second-order logic, the full system of second-order logic cannot be interpreted in plural logic. This means it is formally possible to eliminate plural logic in favor of monadic second-order logic. However, a number of philosophical considerations militate against such an elimination. The conclusion of this chapter echoes that of the preceding ones: although the two systems can occasionally be used for similar purposes, the notions they represent are different and must be kept apart.

There has been significant research effort focussed on the study of regular languages, since they play a vital role in our understanding of computation. This existing research draws a large number of connections with other areas, such as algebra and symbolic logic. Recently, research has begun into how diagrammatic logics can define regular languages, providing another mechanism through which we can understand regular languages. However, the formalised diagrammatic logics are first-order, so they cannot define non-starfree regular languages. The primary contributions of this paper are: (a) to develop and formalise a second-order diagrammatic logic, extending spider diagrams of order, and (b) to establish a class of regular languages that this logic can define. This lays the essential foundations for providing an exact classification of the regular languages that are definable using this new second-order logic.

It has been known for a few years that no more than Π11 ∆13 comprehension is needed for the proof of “Frege’s Theorem.” One can at least imagine a view that would regard Pi-1-1 comprehension axioms as logical truths but deny that status to any that are more complex—a view that would, in particular, deny that full second-order logic deserves the name. Such a view would serve the purposes of neo-logicists. It is, in fact, no part of my view that, say, Delta-3-1 comprehension axioms are not logical truths. What I suggest, however, is that there is a special case to be made on behalf of Pi-1-1 comprehension. Making the case involves investigating extensions of first-order logic that do not rely upon the presence of second-order quantifiers. A formal system for so-called “ancestral logic” is developed, and it is then extended to yield what I call “Arché logic.”

Quantified propositional logic is an extension of classical propositional logic where quantifications over atomic formulas are permitted. As such, quantified propositional logic is a fragment of second-order logic, and its sentences are usually referred to as quantified Boolean formulas (QBFs). The motivation to study quantified propositional logic for paraconsistent reasoning is based on two fundamental observations. Firstly, in recent years, practicably efficient solvers for quantified propositional logic have been presented. Secondly, complexity results imply that there is a wide range of paraconsistent reasoning problems which can be efficiently represented in terms of QBFs. Hence, solvers for QBFs can be used as a core engine in systems prototypically implementing several of such reasoning tasks, most of them lacking concrete realisations. To this end, we show how certain paraconsistent reasoning principles can be naturally formulated or reformulated by means of quantified Boolean formulas. More precisely, we describe polynomial-time constructible encodings providing axiomatisations of the given reasoning tasks. In this way, a whole variety of a priori distinct approaches to paraconsistent reasoning become comparable in a uniform setting.KeywordsPropositional LogicConjunctive Normal FormReasoning TaskTruth AssignmentBoolean FormulaThese keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.