LARA

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision Both sides next revision
sav07_lecture_23 [2007/07/02 17:23]
simon.blanchoud
sav07_lecture_23 [2007/07/02 17:51]
simon.blanchoud
Line 130: Line 130:
   * First-order theory : $\forall x \exist y . f(f(a,a), x) = f(y, a) \wedge y \neq a$   * First-order theory : $\forall x \exist y . f(f(a,a), x) = f(y, a) \wedge y \neq a$
 This is First-Order Logic (FOL) with variables ! We can relate this to set constraints This is First-Order Logic (FOL) with variables ! We can relate this to set constraints
 +
  
 ==== Monadic Class of FOL ==== ==== Monadic Class of FOL ====
  
- MFOL has : only unary predicates, no function symbol, quatifiers and logic.+ MFOL(({{bachmairetal93setconstraintsmonadicclass.ps|Set constraints are the monadic class}}))  ​has : only unary predicates, no function symbol, quatifiers and logic.
  
 Translating this to our sets language :  Translating this to our sets language : 
-  F := +  F := S = S 
 +     | S ⊆ S 
 +     | card(S) ≥ k 
 +     | card(S) = k 
 +     | F ∧ F 
 +     | ¬ F 
 +     | ∃v.F 
 +  S := v 
 +     | S ∪ S 
 +     | S ∩ S 
 +     | S' 
 +     | ∅ 
 +     | 1 
 + 
 + Where : 
 +  * $card(S) \geq k$ is syntactic sugar to represent a unary operator, as $k$ is not a variable, that compare the cardinality of $S$ with $k$ 
 +  * $k \geq 0$ is an integer 
 +  * $S'$ is the complement set of $S$ 
 +  * $1$ represents the whole universe 
 + 
 + In order to agree with our definitions of set constraints,​ we need to eliminate : 
 +  * $S_1 = S_2 \rightarrow S_1 \subseteq S_2 \wedge S_2 \subseteq S_1 $ 
 +  * $S_1 \subseteq S_2 \rightarrow card(S_1 \cup S_2') = 0$ 
 + 
 +We then have to be able to represent the following formulas : 
 +  * $\neg(card(s) \geq k) \rightarrow \bigvee_{i=0}^{k-1} card(S) = i$ 
 +  * $\neg(card(s) = k) \rightarrow card(S) \geq k+1 \vee \bigvee_{i=0}^{k-1} card(S) = i$ 
 + 
 +We can then perform quantifier elimination. Note that this is not possible in case we do not have the $card$ operator : \[\exists v.card(S_1 \cap v) = k_1 \wedge card(S_1 \cap v') = k_2 \Rightarrow card(S_1) = k_1 + k_2\] 
 + 
 +After elimination of the quantifiers,​ deciding the result of the formula is trivial.
  
-Deciding monadic class (({{bachmairetal93setconstraintsmonadicclass.ps|Set constraints are the monadic class}})+If we add to our language the possibility ot replace $k$ by $card(S)$ then this new language is still decidable and is equivalent ​to Presbulgarian arithmetic !
-  * reduction ​to boolean algebras (MSOL fragment, has QE) +
-  * small model property +
-  * resolution variants+