Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userMonadic second order finite satisfiability and unbounded tree-width
541
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Tomer Kotek
Publication date
2015
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
The finite satisfiability problem of monadic second order logic is decidable only on classes of structures of bounded tree-width by the classic result of Seese (1991). We prove the following problem is decidable: Input: (i) A monadic second order logic sentence $alpha$, and (ii) a sentence $beta$ in the two-variable fragment of first order logic extended with counting quantifiers. The vocabularies of $alpha$ and $beta$ may intersect. Output: Is there a finite structure which satisfies $alphalandbeta$ such that the restriction of the structure to the vocabulary of $alpha$ has bounded tree-width? (The tree-width of the desired structure is not bounded.) As a consequence, we prove the decidability of the satisfiability problem by a finite structure of bounded tree-width of a logic extending monadic second order logic with linear cardinality constraints of the form $|X_{1}|+cdots+|X_{r}|<|Y_{1}|+cdots+|Y_{s}|$, where the $X_{i}$ and $Y_{j}$ are monadic second order variables. We prove the decidability of a similar extension of WS1S.
rate research
Read More
Let S be a commutative semiring. M. Droste and P. Gastin have introduced in 2005 weighted monadic second order logic WMSOL with weights in S. They use a syntactic fragment RMSOL of WMSOL to characterize word functions (power series) recognizable by weighted automata, where the semantics of quantifiers is used both as arithmetical operations and, in the boolean case, as quantification. Already in 2001, B. Courcelle, J.Makowsky and U. Rotics have introduced a formalism for graph parameters definable in Monadic Second order Logic, here called MSOLEVAL with values in a ring R. Their framework can be easily adapted to semirings S. This formalism clearly separates the logical part from the arithmetical part and also applies to word functions. In this paper we give two proofs that RMSOL and MSOLEVAL with values in S have the same expressive power over words. One proof shows directly that MSOLEVAL captures the functions recognizable by weighted automata. The other proof shows how to translate the formalisms from one into the other.
We consider a specific class of tree structures that can represent basic structures in linguistics and computer science such as XML documents, parse trees, and treebanks, namely, finite node-labeled sibling-ordered trees. We present axiomatizations of the monadic second-order logic (MSO), monadic transitive closure logic (FO(TC1)) and monadic least fixed-point logic (FO(LFP1)) theories of this class of structures. These logics can express important properties such as reachability. Using model-theoretic techniques, we show by a uniform argument that these axiomatizations are complete, i.e., each formula that is valid on all finite trees is provable using our axioms. As a backdrop to our positive results, on arbitrary structures, the logics that we study are known to be non-recursively axiomatizable.
We characterise the sentences in Monadic Second-order Logic (MSO) that are over finite structures equivalent to a Datalog program, in terms of an existential pebble game. We also show that for every class C of finite structures that can be expressed in MSO and is closed under homomorphisms, and for all integers l,k, there exists a *canonical* Datalog program Pi of width (l,k), that is, a Datalog program of width (l,k) which is sound for C (i.e., Pi only derives the goal predicate on a finite structure A if A is in C) and with the property that Pi derives the goal predicate whenever *some* Datalog program of width (l,k) which is sound for C derives the goal predicate. The same characterisations also hold for Guarded Second-order Logic (GSO), which properly extends MSO. To prove our results, we show that every class C in GSO whose complement is closed under homomorphisms is a finite union of constraint satisfaction problems (CSPs) of countably categorical structures.
Seeses conjecture for finite graphs states that monadic second-order logic (MSO) is undecidable on all graph classes of unbounded clique-width. We show that to establish this it would suffice to show that grids of unbounded size can be interpreted in two families of graph classes: minimal hereditary classes of unbounded clique-width; and antichains of unbounded clique-width under the induced subgraph relation. We explore a number of known examples of the former category and establish that grids of unbounded size can indeed be interpreted in them.
In control theory, to solve a finite-horizon sequential decision problem (SDP) commonly means to find a list of decision rules that result in an optimal expected total reward (or cost) when taking a given number of decision steps. SDPs are routinely solved using Bellmans backward induction. Textbook authors (e.g. Bertsekas or Puterman) typically give more or less formal proofs to show that the backward induction algorithm is correct as solution method for deterministic and stochastic SDPs. Botta, Jansson and Ionescu propose a generic framework for finite horizon, monadic SDPs together with a monadic version of backward induction for solving such SDPs. In monadic SDPs, the monad captures a generic notion of uncertainty, while a generic measure function aggregates rewards. In the present paper we define a notion of correctness for monadic SDPs and identify three conditions that allow us to prove a correctness result for monadic backward induction that is comparable to textbook correctness proofs for ordinary backward induction. The conditions that we impose are fairly general and can be cast in category-theoretical terms using the notion of Eilenberg-Moore-algebra. They hold in familiar settings like those of deterministic or stochastic SDPs but we also give examples in which they fail. Our results show that backward induction can safely be employed for a broader class of SDPs than usually treated in textbooks. However, they also rule out certain instances that were considered admissible in the context of Botta et al.s generic framework. Our development is formalised in Idris as an extension of the Botta et al. framework and the sources are available as supplementary material.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
