اشترك بالحزمة الذهبية واحصل على وصول غير محدود شمرا أكاديميا
تسجيل مستخدم جديدDecidability properties for fragments of CHR
162
0
0.0
(
0
)
اسأل ChatGPT حول البحث
ﻻ يوجد ملخص باللغة العربية
We study the decidability of termination for two CHR dialects which, similarly to the Datalog like languages, are defined by using a signature which does not allow function symbols (of arity >0). Both languages allow the use of the = built-in in the body of rules, thus are built on a host language that supports unification. However each imposes one further restriction. The first CHR dialect allows only range-restricted rules, that is, it does not allow the use of variables in the body or in the guard of a rule if they do not appear in the head. We show that the existence of an infinite computation is decidable for this dialect. The second dialect instead limits the number of atoms in the head of rules to one. We prove that in this case, the existence of a terminating computation is decidable. These results show that both dialects are strictly less expressive than Turing Machines. It is worth noting that the language (without function symbols) without these restrictions is as expressive as Turing Machines.
قيم البحث
اقرأ أيضاً
Quantified modal logic provides a natural logical language for reasoning about modal attitudes even while retaining the richness of quantification for referring to predicates over domains. But then most fragments of the logic are undecidable, over ma
ny model classes. Over the years, only a few fragments (such as the monodic) have been shown to be decidable. In this paper, we study fragments that bundle quantifiers and modalities together, inspired by earlier work on epistemic logics of know-how/why/what. As always with quantified modal logics, it makes a significant difference whether the domain stays the same across worlds, or not. In particular, we show that the bundle $forall Box$ is undecidable over constant domain interpretations, even with only monadic predicates, whereas $exists Box$ bundle is decidable. On the other hand, over increasing domain interpretations, we get decidability with both $forall Box$ and $exists Box$ bundles with unrestricted predicates. In these cases, we also obtain tableau based procedures that run in PSPACE. We further show that the $exists Box$ bundle cannot distinguish between constant domain and increasing domain interpretations.
We investigate the decidability and complexity status of model-checking problems on unlabelled reachability graphs of Petri nets by considering first-order and modal languages without labels on transitions or atomic propositions on markings. We consi
der several parameters to separate decidable problems from undecidable ones. Not only are we able to provide precise borders and a systematic analysis, but we also demonstrate the robustness of our proof techniques.
Constraint Handling Rules (CHR) is a committed-choice declarative language which has been originally designed for writing constraint solvers and which is nowadays a general purpose language. CHR programs consist of multi-headed guarded rules which al
low to rewrite constraints into simpler ones until a solved form is reached. Many empirical evidences suggest that multiple heads augment the expressive power of the language, however no formal result in this direction has been proved, so far. In the first part of this paper we analyze the Turing completeness of CHR with respect to the underneath constraint theory. We prove that if the constraint theory is powerful enough then restricting to single head rules does not affect the Turing completeness of the language. On the other hand, differently from the case of the multi-headed language, the single head CHR language is not Turing powerful when the underlying signature (for the constraint theory) does not contain function symbols. In the second part we prove that, no matter which constraint theory is considered, under some reasonable assumptions it is not possible to encode the CHR language (with multi-headed rules) into a single headed language while preserving the semantics of the programs. We also show that, under some stronger assumptions, considering an increasing number of atoms in the head of a rule augments the expressive power of the language. These results provide a formal proof for the claim that multiple heads augment the expressive power of the CHR language.
We study resource similarity and resource bisimilarity -- congruent restrictions of the bisimulation equivalence for the (P,P)-class of Process Rewrite Systems (PRS). Both these equivalences coincide with the bisimulation equivalence for (1,P)-subcla
ss of (P,P)-PRS, which is known to be decidable. While it has been shown in the literature that resource similarity is undecidable for (P,P)-PRS, decidability of resource bisimilarity for (P,P)-PRS remained an open question. In this paper, we present an algorithm for checking resource bisimilarity for (P,P)-PRS. We show that although both resource similarity and resource bisimilarity are congruences and have a finite semi-linear basis, only the latter is decidable.
In this paper syntactic objects---concept constructors called part restrictions which realize rational grading are considered in Description Logics (DLs). Being able to convey statements about a rational part of a set of successors, part restrictions
essentially enrich the expressive capabilities of DLs. We examine an extension of well-studied DL ALCQIHR+ with part restrictions, and prove that the reasoning in the extended logic is still decidable. The proof uses tableaux technique augmented with indices technique, designed for dealing with part restrictions.
سجل دخول لتتمكن من نشر تعليقات
التعليقات
جاري جلب التعليقات
سجل دخول لتتمكن من متابعة معايير البحث التي قمت باختيارها
