tree languages definable with one quantifier alternation
play

Tree Languages Definable with One Quantifier Alternation Mikoaj - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Tree Languages Definable with One Quantifier Alternation Mikoaj Bojaczyk (Warszawa) Luc Segoufin (Paris) e following problem is decidable: Input : A regular tree language L , given by a tree automaton. Question : Is L definable by a


  1. Tree Languages Definable with One Quantifier Alternation Mikołaj Bojańczyk (Warszawa) Luc Segoufin (Paris)

  2. e following problem is decidable: Input : A regular tree language L , given by a tree automaton. Question : Is L definable by a formula with quantifier prefix ∃ * ∀ * and also by a formula with quantifier prefix ∀ * ∃ *

  3. is talk is about understanding the expressive power of logics on words and trees. e logics involved can only define (some) regular languages.

  4. is talk is about understanding the expressive power of logics on words and trees. e logics involved can only define (some) regular languages. Understand logic X = give na algorithm to decide if a language L is definable in X all regular languages languages definable in logic X

  5. Why this notion of understanding? ere is a rich theory connecting logic, regular languages, and algebra.

  6. Why this notion of understanding? ere is a rich theory connecting logic, regular languages, and algebra. eorem. (Schützenberger, McNaughton/Papert) e following are equivalent for a word language: – L is definable in first-order logic – L is star-free – the syntactic monoid of L is group-free

  7. Why this notion of understanding? ere is a rich theory connecting logic, regular languages, and algebra. eorem. (Schützenberger, McNaughton/Papert) e following are equivalent for a word language: – L is definable in first-order logic – L is star-free – the syntactic monoid of L is group-free ... more results, including modulo quantifiers, the quantifier alternation hierarchy, etc.

  8. Why this notion of understanding? is paper is part of a program investigating the algebra- logic connection for trees. Eventually, we want to answer ere is a rich theory connecting logic, regular languages, and algebra. questions such as: – what is the expressive power of first-order logic on trees? – what is a tree group? – is there a Krohn-Rhodes decomposition theory? eorem. (Schützenberger, McNaughton/Papert) e following are equivalent for a word language: – L is definable in first-order logic – L is star-free – the syntactic monoid of L is group-free ... more results, including modulo quantifiers, the quantifier alternation hierarchy, etc.

  9. eorem. (Etessami, Schützenberger, Schwentick, érien, Vollimer, Wilke) e following formalisms define the same word languages:

  10. eorem. (Etessami, Schützenberger, Schwentick, érien, Vollimer, Wilke) e following formalisms define the same word languages: b* · a · { a,b,c } *

  11. eorem. (Etessami, Schützenberger, Schwentick, érien, Vollimer, Wilke) e following formalisms define the same word languages: b* · a · { a,b,c } * 1. Two-variable first-order logic

  12. eorem. (Etessami, Schützenberger, Schwentick, érien, Vollimer, Wilke) e following formalisms define the same word languages: b* · a · { a,b,c } * 1. Two-variable first-order logic � � ∃ x. a ( x ) ∧ ∀ y < x. b ( y )

  13. eorem. (Etessami, Schützenberger, Schwentick, érien, Vollimer, Wilke) e following formalisms define the same word languages: b* · a · { a,b,c } * 1. Two-variable first-order logic 2. Temporal logic with operators F and F -1

  14. eorem. (Etessami, Schützenberger, Schwentick, érien, Vollimer, Wilke) e following formalisms define the same word languages: b* · a · { a,b,c } * 1. Two-variable first-order logic 2. Temporal logic with operators F and F -1 a ∧ ¬ ( F − 1 c ) � � F

  15. eorem. (Etessami, Schützenberger, Schwentick, érien, Vollimer, Wilke) e following formalisms define the same word languages: b* · a · { a,b,c } * 1. Two-variable first-order logic 2. Temporal logic with operators F and F -1 3. Languages definable with prefix ∃ * ∀ * and also with prefix ∀ * ∃ *

  16. eorem. (Etessami, Schützenberger, Schwentick, érien, Vollimer, Wilke) e following formalisms define the same word languages: b* · a · { a,b,c } * 1. Two-variable first-order logic 2. Temporal logic with operators F and F -1 3. Languages definable with prefix ∃ * ∀ * and also with prefix ∀ * ∃ * � � ∀ x ∃ y. c ( x ) ⇒ y < x ∧ a ( y )

  17. eorem. (Etessami, Schützenberger, Schwentick, érien, Vollimer, Wilke) e following formalisms define the same word languages: b* · a · { a,b,c } * 1. Two-variable first-order logic 2. Temporal logic with operators F and F -1 3. Languages definable with prefix ∃ * ∀ * and also with prefix ∀ * ∃ * 4. Two – way ordered deterministic automata

  18. eorem. (Etessami, Schützenberger, Schwentick, érien, Vollimer, Wilke) e following formalisms define the same word languages: b* · a · { a,b,c } * 1. Two-variable first-order logic 2. Temporal logic with operators F and F -1 3. Languages definable with prefix ∃ * ∀ * and also with prefix ∀ * ∃ * 4. Two – way ordered deterministic automata a ⇾ b ⇾

  19. eorem. (Etessami, Schützenberger, Schwentick, érien, Vollimer, Wilke) e following formalisms define the same word languages: b* · a · { a,b,c } * 1. Two-variable first-order logic 2. Temporal logic with operators F and F -1 3. Languages definable with prefix ∃ * ∀ * and also with prefix ∀ * ∃ * 4. Two – way ordered deterministic automata 5. Turtle automata

  20. eorem. (Etessami, Schützenberger, Schwentick, érien, Vollimer, Wilke) e following formalisms define the same word languages: b* · a · { a,b,c } * 1. Two-variable first-order logic 2. Temporal logic with operators F and F -1 3. Languages definable with prefix ∃ * ∀ * and also with prefix ∀ * ∃ * 4. Two – way ordered deterministic automata 5. Turtle automata “go right to first a; go left to first c ” fails “go right to first a ” works

  21. eorem. (Etessami, Schützenberger, Schwentick, érien, Vollimer, Wilke) e following formalisms define the same word languages: b* · a · { a,b,c } * 1. Two-variable first-order logic 2. Temporal logic with operators F and F -1 3. Languages definable with prefix ∃ * ∀ * and also with prefix ∀ * ∃ * 4. Two – way ordered deterministic automata 5. Turtle automata 6. Monoids in DA

  22. eorem. (Etessami, Schützenberger, Schwentick, érien, Vollimer, Wilke) e following formalisms define the same word languages: b* · a · { a,b,c } * 1. Two-variable first-order logic 2. Temporal logic with operators F and F -1 3. Languages definable with prefix ∃ * ∀ * and also with prefix ∀ * ∃ * 4. Two – way ordered deterministic automata 5. Turtle automata 6. Monoids in DA 7. A type of unambiguous expression

  23. eorem. (Etessami, Schützenberger, Schwentick, érien, Vollimer, Wilke) e following formalisms define the same word languages: b* · a · { a,b,c } * 1. Two-variable first-order logic 2. Temporal logic with operators F and F -1 3. Languages definable with prefix ∃ * ∀ * and also with prefix ∀ * ∃ * What about trees? 4. Two – way ordered deterministic automata 5. Turtle automata 6. Monoids in DA 7. A type of unambiguous expression

  24. eorem. (Etessami, Schützenberger, Schwentick, érien, Vollimer, Wilke) e following formalisms define the same word languages: b* · a · { a,b,c } * 1. Two-variable first-order logic 2. Temporal logic with operators F and F -1 3. Languages definable with prefix ∃ * ∀ * and also with prefix ∀ * ∃ * 4. Two – way ordered deterministic automata 5. Turtle automata 6. Monoids in DA 7. A type of unambiguous expression

  25. eorem. (Etessami, Schützenberger, Schwentick, érien, Vollimer, Wilke) e following formalisms define the same word languages: b* · a · { a,b,c } * 1. Two-variable first-order logic 2. Temporal logic with operators F and F -1 3. Languages definable with prefix ∃ * ∀ * and also with prefix ∀ * ∃ * 4. Two – way ordered deterministic automata 5. Turtle automata 6. Monoids in DA

  26. eorem. (Etessami, Schützenberger, Schwentick, érien, Vollimer, Wilke) e following formalisms define the same word languages: b* · a · { a,b,c } * 1. Two-variable first-order logic 2. Temporal logic with operators F and F -1 3. Languages definable with prefix ∃ * ∀ * and also with prefix ∀ * ∃ * 5. Turtle automata 6. Monoids in DA

  27. eorem. (Etessami, Schützenberger, Schwentick, érien, Vollimer, Wilke) e following formalisms define the same word languages: b* · a · { a,b,c } * 1. Two-variable first-order logic 2. Temporal logic with operators F and F -1 3. Languages definable with prefix ∃ * ∀ * and also with prefix ∀ * ∃ * 6. Monoids in DA

  28. 1. Two-variable first-order logic 2. Temporal logic with operators F and F -1 3. Languages definable with prefix ∃ * ∀ * and also with prefix ∀ * ∃ * 6. Monoids in DA

  29. 1. Two-variable first-order logic 2. Temporal logic with operators F and F -1 3. Languages definable with prefix ∃ * ∀ * and also with prefix ∀ * ∃ * 6. Monoids in DA

  30. 1. Two-variable first-order logic 2. Temporal logic with operators F and F -1 3. Languages definable with prefix ∃ * ∀ * and also with prefix ∀ * ∃ * 6. Monoids in DA

  31. 1. Two-variable first-order logic 2. Temporal logic with operators F and F -1 3. Languages definable with prefix ∃ * ∀ * and also with prefix ∀ * ∃ * 6. Monoids in DA

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend


More recommend