On Finite Satisfiability of Two-Variable First-Order Logic with Equivalence Relations

Author(s):  
Emanuel Kieronski ◽  
Lidia Tendera
2012 ◽  
Vol 77 (3) ◽  
pp. 729-765 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emanuel Kieroński ◽  
Martin Otto

AbstractWe study first-order logic with two variables FO2 and establish a small substructure property. Similar to the small model property for FO2 we obtain an exponential size bound on embedded substructures, relative to a fixed surrounding structure that may be infinite. We apply this technique to analyse the satisfiability problem for FO2 under constraints that require several binary relations to be interpreted as equivalence relations. With a single equivalence relation, FO2 has the finite model property and is complete for non-deterministic exponential time, just as for plain FO2. With two equivalence relations, FO2 does not have the finite model property, but is shown to be decidable via a construction of regular models that admit finite descriptions even though they may necessarily be infinite. For three or more equivalence relations, FO2 is undecidable.


2017 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 508-532 ◽  
Author(s):  
PAOLO BOTTONI ◽  
DANIELE GORLA ◽  
STEFANO KASANGIAN ◽  
ANNA LABELLA

The study of algebraic modelling of labelled non-deterministic concurrent processes leads us to consider a category LB, obtained from a complete meet-semilattice B and from B-valued equivalence relations. We prove that, if B has enough properties, then LB presents a two-fold internal logical structure, induced by two doctrines definable on it: one related to its families of subobjects and one to its families of regular subobjects. The first doctrine is Heyting and makes LB a Heyting category, the second one is Boolean. We will see that the difference between these two logical structures, namely the different behaviour of the negation operator, can be interpreted in terms of a distinction between non-deterministic and deterministic behaviours of agents able to perform computations in the context of the same process. Moreover, the sorted first-order logic naturally associated with LB can be extended to a modal/temporal logic, again using the doctrinal setting. Relations are also drawn to other computational models.


2009 ◽  
Vol 19 (12) ◽  
pp. 3091-3099 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gui-Hong XU ◽  
Jian ZHANG

Author(s):  
Tim Button ◽  
Sean Walsh

Chapters 6-12 are driven by questions about the ability to pin down mathematical entities and to articulate mathematical concepts. This chapter is driven by similar questions about the ability to pin down the semantic frameworks of language. It transpires that there are not just non-standard models, but non-standard ways of doing model theory itself. In more detail: whilst we normally outline a two-valued semantics which makes sentences True or False in a model, the inference rules for first-order logic are compatible with a four-valued semantics; or a semantics with countably many values; or what-have-you. The appropriate level of generality here is that of a Boolean-valued model, which we introduce. And the plurality of possible semantic values gives rise to perhaps the ‘deepest’ level of indeterminacy questions: How can humans pin down the semantic framework for their languages? We consider three different ways for inferentialists to respond to this question.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-28
Author(s):  
IVANO CIARDELLI ◽  
GIANLUCA GRILLETTI

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michał Walicki

Abstract Graph normal form, introduced earlier for propositional logic, is shown to be a normal form also for first-order logic. It allows to view syntax of theories as digraphs, while their semantics as kernels of these digraphs. Graphs are particularly well suited for studying circularity, and we provide some general means for verifying that circular or apparently circular extensions are conservative. Traditional syntactic means of ensuring conservativity, like definitional extensions or positive occurrences guaranteeing exsitence of fixed points, emerge as special cases.


1991 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 123-138
Author(s):  
Joachim Biskup ◽  
Bernhard Convent

In this paper the relationship between dependency theory and first-order logic is explored in order to show how relational chase procedures (i.e., algorithms to decide inference problems for dependencies) can be interpreted as clever implementations of well known refutation procedures of first-order logic with resolution and paramodulation. On the one hand this alternative interpretation provides a deeper insight into the theoretical foundations of chase procedures, whereas on the other hand it makes available an already well established theory with a great amount of known results and techniques to be used for further investigations of the inference problem for dependencies. Our presentation is a detailed and careful elaboration of an idea formerly outlined by Grant and Jacobs which up to now seems to be disregarded by the database community although it definitely deserves more attention.


2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (8) ◽  
pp. 1311-1344 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lauri T Hella ◽  
Miikka S Vilander

Abstract We propose a new version of formula size game for modal logic. The game characterizes the equivalence of pointed Kripke models up to formulas of given numbers of modal operators and binary connectives. Our game is similar to the well-known Adler–Immerman game. However, due to a crucial difference in the definition of positions of the game, its winning condition is simpler, and the second player does not have a trivial optimal strategy. Thus, unlike the Adler–Immerman game, our game is a genuine two-person game. We illustrate the use of the game by proving a non-elementary succinctness gap between bisimulation invariant first-order logic $\textrm{FO}$ and (basic) modal logic $\textrm{ML}$. We also present a version of the game for the modal $\mu $-calculus $\textrm{L}_\mu $ and show that $\textrm{FO}$ is also non-elementarily more succinct than $\textrm{L}_\mu $.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document