First-Order Temporal Logic on Finite Traces: Semantic Properties, Decidable Fragments, and Applications

IF 0.7 4区 数学 Q3 COMPUTER SCIENCE, THEORY & METHODS ACM Transactions on Computational Logic Pub Date : 2024-03-05 DOI:10.1145/3651161
Alessandro Artale, Andrea Mazzullo, Ana Ozaki
{"title":"First-Order Temporal Logic on Finite Traces: Semantic Properties, Decidable Fragments, and Applications","authors":"Alessandro Artale, Andrea Mazzullo, Ana Ozaki","doi":"10.1145/3651161","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Formalisms based on temporal logics interpreted over finite strict linear orders, known in the literature as <i>finite traces</i>, have been used for temporal specification in automated planning, process modelling, (runtime) verification and synthesis of programs, as well as in knowledge representation and reasoning. In this paper, we focus on <i>first-order temporal logic on finite traces</i>. We first investigate preservation of equivalences and satisfiability of formulas between finite and infinite traces, by providing a set of semantic and syntactic conditions to guarantee when the distinction between reasoning in the two cases can be blurred. Moreover, we show that the satisfiability problem on finite traces for several decidable fragments of first-order temporal logic is <span>ExpSpace</span>-complete, as in the infinite trace case, while it decreases to <span>NExpTime</span> when finite traces bounded in the number of instants are considered. This leads also to new complexity results for temporal description logics over finite traces. Finally, we investigate applications to planning and verification, in particular by establishing connections with the notions of insensitivity to infiniteness and safety from the literature. </p><p>Linear temporal logic over finite traces is used as a formalism for temporal specification in automated planning, process modelling and (runtime) verification. In this paper, we investigate first-order temporal logic over finite traces, lifting some known results to a more expressive setting. Satisfiability in the two-variable monodic fragment is shown to be <span>ExpSpace</span>-complete, as for the infinite trace case, while it decreases to <span>NExpTime</span> when we consider finite traces bounded in the number of instants. This leads to new complexity results for temporal description logics over finite traces. We further investigate satisfiability and equivalences of formulas under a model-theoretic perspective, providing a set of semantic conditions that characterise when the distinction between reasoning over finite and infinite traces can be blurred. Finally, we apply these conditions to planning and verification.</p>","PeriodicalId":50916,"journal":{"name":"ACM Transactions on Computational Logic","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACM Transactions on Computational Logic","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3651161","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"数学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, THEORY & METHODS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Formalisms based on temporal logics interpreted over finite strict linear orders, known in the literature as finite traces, have been used for temporal specification in automated planning, process modelling, (runtime) verification and synthesis of programs, as well as in knowledge representation and reasoning. In this paper, we focus on first-order temporal logic on finite traces. We first investigate preservation of equivalences and satisfiability of formulas between finite and infinite traces, by providing a set of semantic and syntactic conditions to guarantee when the distinction between reasoning in the two cases can be blurred. Moreover, we show that the satisfiability problem on finite traces for several decidable fragments of first-order temporal logic is ExpSpace-complete, as in the infinite trace case, while it decreases to NExpTime when finite traces bounded in the number of instants are considered. This leads also to new complexity results for temporal description logics over finite traces. Finally, we investigate applications to planning and verification, in particular by establishing connections with the notions of insensitivity to infiniteness and safety from the literature.

Linear temporal logic over finite traces is used as a formalism for temporal specification in automated planning, process modelling and (runtime) verification. In this paper, we investigate first-order temporal logic over finite traces, lifting some known results to a more expressive setting. Satisfiability in the two-variable monodic fragment is shown to be ExpSpace-complete, as for the infinite trace case, while it decreases to NExpTime when we consider finite traces bounded in the number of instants. This leads to new complexity results for temporal description logics over finite traces. We further investigate satisfiability and equivalences of formulas under a model-theoretic perspective, providing a set of semantic conditions that characterise when the distinction between reasoning over finite and infinite traces can be blurred. Finally, we apply these conditions to planning and verification.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
有限轨迹上的一阶时态逻辑:语义属性、可解片段及应用
基于在有限严格线性阶上解释的时序逻辑(文献中称为有限迹线)的形式主义,已被用于自动规划、流程建模、程序(运行时)验证和综合以及知识表示和推理中的时序规范。在本文中,我们将重点研究有限踪迹上的一阶时态逻辑。我们首先研究了有限踪迹和无限踪迹之间公式的等价性和可满足性的保持,提供了一组语义和语法条件,以保证在这两种情况下推理之间的区别可能模糊不清。此外,我们还证明,对于一阶时间逻辑的几个可判定片段,有限踪迹上的可满足性问题与无限踪迹的情况一样,是ExpSpace-complete的,而当考虑到有限踪迹时,其复杂性会降低到 NExpTime。这也为有限踪迹上的时态描述符逻辑带来了新的复杂性结果。最后,我们研究了规划和验证的应用,特别是通过与文献中的无穷大不敏感性和安全性概念建立联系。有限轨迹上的线性时态逻辑被用作自动规划、流程建模和(运行时)验证中时态规范的形式主义。在本文中,我们研究了有限迹线上的一阶时间逻辑,将一些已知结果提升到一个更具表现力的环境中。与无限迹线情况一样,双变量单模片段的满足性被证明是ExpSpace-complete的,而当我们考虑有限迹线时,其满足性则下降到NEXpTime。这为有限踪迹上的时态描述逻辑学带来了新的复杂性结果。我们从模型理论的角度进一步研究了公式的可满足性和等价性,并提供了一组语义条件,这些条件描述了有限踪迹推理和无限踪迹推理之间的区别何时会变得模糊。最后,我们将这些条件应用于规划和验证。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
ACM Transactions on Computational Logic
ACM Transactions on Computational Logic 工程技术-计算机:理论方法
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
37
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: TOCL welcomes submissions related to all aspects of logic as it pertains to topics in computer science. This area has a great tradition in computer science. Several researchers who earned the ACM Turing award have also contributed to this field, namely Edgar Codd (relational database systems), Stephen Cook (complexity of logical theories), Edsger W. Dijkstra, Robert W. Floyd, Tony Hoare, Amir Pnueli, Dana Scott, Edmond M. Clarke, Allen E. Emerson, and Joseph Sifakis (program logics, program derivation and verification, programming languages semantics), Robin Milner (interactive theorem proving, concurrency calculi, and functional programming), and John McCarthy (functional programming and logics in AI). Logic continues to play an important role in computer science and has permeated several of its areas, including artificial intelligence, computational complexity, database systems, and programming languages. The Editorial Board of this journal seeks and hopes to attract high-quality submissions in all the above-mentioned areas of computational logic so that TOCL becomes the standard reference in the field. Both theoretical and applied papers are sought. Submissions showing novel use of logic in computer science are especially welcome.
期刊最新文献
Computationally Hard Problems for Logic Programs under Answer Set Semantics Fundamental Logic is Decidable SAT Modulo Symmetries for Graph Generation and Enumeration Strong Backdoors for Default Logic One or Nothing: Anti-unification over the Simply-Typed Lambda Calculus
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1