B ϋ CHIS MONADIC SECOND ORDER LOGIC Verification Seminar V.Sowjanya Lakshmi ( Subhasree M.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Predicate Logic Colin Campbell. A Formal Language Predicate Logic provides a way to formalize natural language so that ambiguity is removed. Mathematical.
Advertisements

1 First order theories (Chapter 1, Sections 1.4 – 1.5)
PARIXIT PRASAD December 4, 2013 Parixit Prasad | CSA - IISC 1 Deciding Presburger Arithmetic Using Automata Department of Computer Science and Automaton.
Linked List Implementation class List { private List next; private Object data; private static List root; private static int size; public static void addNew(Object.
Formal Semantics of Programming Languages 虞慧群 Topic 5: Axiomatic Semantics.
1 541: Relational Calculus. 2 Relational Calculus  Comes in two flavours: Tuple relational calculus (TRC) and Domain relational calculus (DRC).  Calculus.
Predicate Calculus Formal Methods in Verification of Computer Systems Jeremy Johnson.
1 Conditional XPath, the first order complete XPath dialect Maarten Marx Presented by: Einav Bar-Ner.
Computability and Complexity 8-1 Computability and Complexity Andrei Bulatov Logic Reminder.
Exam #3 is Friday. It will consist of proofs, plus symbolizations in predicate logic.
1 2. Constraint Databases Next level of data abstraction: Constraint level – finitely represents by constraints the logical level.
Chapter Predicate Calculus Formal language –True/False statements –Supports reasoning Usage –Integrity constraints –Non-procedural query languages.
Search in the semantic domain. Some definitions atomic formula: smallest formula possible (no sub- formulas) literal: atomic formula or negation of an.
Last time Proof-system search ( ` ) Interpretation search ( ² ) Quantifiers Equality Decision procedures Induction Cross-cutting aspectsMain search strategy.
Discrete Mathematics Math 6A Instructor: M. Welling.
EE1J2 - Slide 1 EE1J2 – Discrete Maths Lecture 6 Limitations of propositional logic Introduction to predicate logic Symbols, terms and formulae, Parse.
Introduction to Database Systems 1 Relational Calculus Relational Model : Topic 2.
Rutgers University Relational Calculus 198:541 Rutgers University.
Knowledge Interchange Format Michael Gruninger National Institute of Standards and Technology
Database Management Systems 3ed, R. Ramakrishnan and J. Gehrke1 Relational Calculus Chapter 4, Section 4.3.
LDK R Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation First Order Logics (FOL) Originally by Alessandro Agostini and Fausto Giunchiglia Modified by Fausto.
Introduction to Quantification Chapter 9 Language, Proof and Logic.
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE Lecture 3 Predicate Calculus.
CS344: Introduction to Artificial Intelligence Lecture: Herbrand’s Theorem Proving satisfiability of logic formulae using semantic trees (from Symbolic.
CS621: Artificial Intelligence Pushpak Bhattacharyya CSE Dept., IIT Bombay Lecture 28– Interpretation; Herbrand Interpertation 30 th Sept, 2010.
LDK R Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation PL of Classes.
DISCRETE COMPUTATIONAL STRUCTURES
Formal Methods in Software Engineering 1
Key Concepts Representation Inference Semantics Discourse Pragmatics Computation.
CS6133 Software Specification and Verification
Discrete Mathematics CS 2610 August 22, Agenda Last class Propositional logic Logical equivalences This week Predicate logic & rules of inference.
For Wednesday Read chapter 9, sections 1-3 Homework: –Chapter 7, exercises 8 and 9.
A Problem That Is Complete for PSPACE (Polynomial Space) BY TEJA SUDHA GARIGANTI.
LDK R Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation First Order Logics (FOL) Originally by Alessandro Agostini and Fausto Giunchiglia Modified by Fausto.
1 First order theories (Chapter 1, Sections 1.4 – 1.5) From the slides for the book “Decision procedures” by D.Kroening and O.Strichman.
Semantics of Predicate Calculus For the propositional calculus, an interpretation was simply an assignment of truth values to the proposition letters of.
Knowledge Repn. & Reasoning Lec. #5: First-Order Logic UIUC CS 498: Section EA Professor: Eyal Amir Fall Semester 2004.
Albert Gatt LIN3021 Formal Semantics Lecture 3. Aims This lecture is divided into two parts: 1. We make our first attempts at formalising the notion of.
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE [INTELLIGENT AGENTS PARADIGM] Professor Janis Grundspenkis Riga Technical University Faculty of Computer Science and Information.
First-Order Logic Semantics Reading: Chapter 8, , FOL Syntax and Semantics read: FOL Knowledge Engineering read: FOL.
Propositional Logic Rather than jumping right into FOL, we begin with propositional logic A logic involves: §Language (with a syntax) §Semantics §Proof.
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE Lecture 2 Propositional Calculus.
Database Management Systems, R. Ramakrishnan1 Relational Calculus Chapter 4, Part B.
An Introduction to Classical Logic (propositional and Predicate Logic)
Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation ClassL (part 1): syntax and semantics.
1/20 Arrays Changki PSWLAB Arrays Daniel Kroening and Ofer Strichman Decision Procedure.
EEL 5937 Content languages EEL 5937 Multi Agent Systems Lecture 10, Feb. 6, 2003 Lotzi Bölöni.
Lecture 041 Predicate Calculus Learning outcomes Students are able to: 1. Evaluate predicate 2. Translate predicate into human language and vice versa.
Section 1.4. Propositional Functions Propositional functions become propositions (and have truth values) when their variables are each replaced by a value.
1 Section 7.1 First-Order Predicate Calculus Predicate calculus studies the internal structure of sentences where subjects are applied to predicates existentially.
Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation ClassL (part 1): syntax and semantics.
Counterexample-Guided Abstraction Refinement By Edmund Clarke, Orna Grumberg, Somesh Jha, Yuan Lu, and Helmut Veith Presented by Yunho Kim Provable Software.
CENG 424-Logic for CS Introduction Based on the Lecture Notes of Konstantin Korovin, Valentin Goranko, Russel and Norvig, and Michael Genesereth.
Relational Calculus Chapter 4, Section 4.3.
Propositional Logic (a.k.a. Sentential Logic)
Introduction to Logic for Artificial Intelligence Lecture 2
Chapter 1 The Foundations: Logic and Proofs
Semantics In propositional logic, we associate atoms with propositions about the world. We specify the semantics of our logic, giving it a “meaning”. Such.
CS201: Data Structures and Discrete Mathematics I
Decidability of logical theories
Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation
MA/CSSE 474 More Math Review Theory of Computation
Formal Methods in software development
Decidability of logical theories
Bottom Up: Soundness and Completeness
Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation
CS201: Data Structures and Discrete Mathematics I
Lecture Notes for SWE 623 by Duminda Wijesekera
Logic Logic is a discipline that studies the principles and methods used to construct valid arguments. An argument is a related sequence of statements.
Bottom Up: Soundness and Completeness
Presentation transcript:

B ϋ CHIS MONADIC SECOND ORDER LOGIC Verification Seminar V.Sowjanya Lakshmi ( Subhasree M.

CONTENTS Introduction Syntax of S1S Semantics of S1S Satisfiability of S1S Proof Conclusion

INTRODUCTION Logic interpreted over Natural Numbers, N 0 ={0,1,…..} Quantification over individual elements of N 0 and subsets of N 0 Natural ordering of N 0 (unique and one successor)

SYNTAX Terms Atomic Formulas Formulas

TERM A term is built up from constant 0 and individual variables x,y,… by application of successor function succ. Examples of terms: 0,succ(x),succ(succ(succ(67))), succ(succ(y))

ATOMIC FORMULAS An atomic formula is of the form t t or t X where t and t are terms and X is a set variable

FORMULAS A formula is built up from atomic formulas using the Boolean connectives (not), (or) with the existential quantifier ( ) Existential quantifier ( ) can be applied to both individual variables and set variables. Examples of formulas:,, ( x), (X)

Remaining Boolean connectives are defined using (not) and (or). Examples: is defined as ( ) is defined as ( ) ( )

UNIVERSAL QUANTIFIER Universal quantifier is defined using ( x) is defined as (( x) ) ( X) is defined as (( X) )

EXAMPLES of Formulas x X is defined as x X X Y is defined as x [(x X x Y) (x Y x X )] Sub(X,Y) is defined as ( x) (x X x Y) Zero(x) is defined as ( x) [(x X ) ( y)(y x)]

Examples Sing(X ) is defined as ( Y )[Sub(Y,X) (Y X) ( Z ) (Sub (Z,Y ) (Z Y ) )] Lt(x,y) is defined as Z [succ(x) Z ( Z )(z Z succ(z) Z )] (y Z )

SEMANTICS Formulas are interpreted over N 0 Individual variables x,y,..are interpreted as natural numbers ie. elements of N 0 Function Successor corresponding to adding one t t is true provided t and t denote the same natural number

Semantics.. Set variables like X,Y,.. are interpreted as subsets of N 0 t X is true iff the number denoted by t belongs to the set denoted by X

Free and bound variables A variable is said to occur free in a formula if it is not within the scope of a quantifier Variables which do not occur free are said to be bound Example: ( x) [(x X ) ( y)(y x)] x and y are bound variables X is free variable

(x 1,x 2,..,x k,..,X 1,X 2,..,X l ) indicates all the variables which occur free come from {x 1,x 2,..,x k,..,X 1,X 2,..,X l } To assign a truth value to the formula (x 1,x 2,..,x k,..,X 1,X 2,..,X l ),map each individual variable x i to a natural number m i N 0 and each set variable X j to a subset M j N 0 M (X) denote that is true under the interpretation {x i m i } i {1,2,..,k} and {X i M i } i {1,2,.., l}

Examples (M,N) Sub(X,Y) iff M N M Zero(X) iff 0 M (m,n) Lt(x,y) iff m<n M Sing(X) iff M is a singleton {m}

Sentence A sentence is a formula in which no variables occur free A sentence is either true or false Assigning values is not needed X [0 X ( x)(x X succ (x) X )] ( x) (x X)

SATISFIABILITY An S1S formula is (x 1,x 2,..,x k,X 1,X 2,..,X l ) is said to be satisfiable if we can choose M 1 = (m 1,m 2,..,m k,M 1,M 2,..,M l ) such that M 1 (X 1 ), where X 1= (x 1,x 2,..,x k,X 1,X 2,..,X l )

Büchi showed that every word in L has an interpretation for the free variables in under which evaluates to true Every interpretation which makes true is represented by some word in L

Satisfiability... is satisfiable iff there is some interpretation which makes it true iff L is nonempty The language L is defined over the alphabet {0,1} m where m is the number of free variables in

Language L ({0,1} m ) ) is S1S definable if L= L for some formula Any Language L can be converted into an equivalent language L {0,1} over{0,1} m L ={ α M | M 1 (X 1 )} L {0,1} ={ α {0,1} | α L}

THEOREM Let be an S1S formula. Then L is an -regular language Let L be an -regular language. Then L {0,1} is S1S definable

Theorem: Let be an S1S formula. Then L is an -regular language Proof : Proof is by induction on the structure of An equivalent language S1S0 is introduced S1S0 does not have individual variables, x i

All variables in S1S0 are set variables, X j Atomic formulas are of the form X Y and succ (X,Y ) X Y is true if X is a subset of Y Succ ( X,Y ) is true if X and Y are singletons {x } and {y } respectively and y = x +1

Converting S1S formula to S1S0 formula 0 such that L = L 0 Removing nested application of successor function succ (succ (x )) X ) can be written as ( y)( z) y =succ(x) z = succ (y) z X

Eliminating formulas of the form 0 X using the formula Zero ( X ) Eliminating singleton variables, using the formula Sing ( x) ( y) succ(x) = y y Z can be written as ( X) (Sing ( X ) [( y ) Sing ( Y ) succ ( X,Y ) Y Z ] )

Construct a Büchi Automaton (A,G ) for S1S0 formula = X Y S2S2,, S1S1

Construct a Büchi Automaton (A,G ) for S1S0 formula = succ (X,Y ) S1S1 S2S2 S3S3

Induction Step Considering the connectives, and X =Ψ, construct the complement of Ψ = 1 2, construct 1 2

=( X 1 ) Ψ (X 1,X 2,..,X l ), the language corresponds to the projection of L Ψ via the function Π:{0,1} m {0,1} m-1, erases the first component of each m-tuple in {0,1} m

Let L be an -regular language. Then L {0,1} is S1S definable. Proof: (A,G) –Büchi Automaton recognizing L = { a 1,a 2,..,a m }, A=(S,, S in ) with S = { s 1,s 2,..,s k } A 1,A 2,..,A m are the free variables A 1 describes the positions in which the input where letter a i occurs S 1,S 2,..,S k describes the runs S j describes the positions in the run where the automaton is in S j

( S 1 ) ( S 2 )…( S k) ( x) i {1,2,..,m} (x A i ) i {1,2,..,m} (x A i ( j i x A j ) ( x) i {1,2,..,k} (x S i ) i {1,2,..,k} (x S i ( j i x S j ) ( x) Si Sin (0 S i ) ( x) (Si,, ai, sk) (x S i ) (x A j ) (succ (x) S k ) Si G ( x) ( y) (x<y) (y S i )

Example a a,b b f e

( S f ) ( Se) ( x) [(x A a ) (x A b ) (x A a x A b ) (x A b x A a ) ] ( x) [(x S f ) (x S e ) (x S f x S e ) (x S e x S f )] (0 S f ) ( x) [((x S f ) (x A a ) succ (x) S f ) ((x S f ) (x A b ) succ (x) S 2 ) ((x S e ) succ (x) S e )] ( x) ( y) (x<y) (y S f )

Conclusion Büchi has proved that Notions of S1S definability and -regularity are equivalent.

Reference Madhavan Mukund. Linear Time Temporal Logic and B ü chi Automata

Thank You