General Logic Programs as Infinite Games

In [vE86] M.H. van Emden introduced a simple game semantics for definite logic programs. Recently [RW05,GRW05], the authors extended this game to apply to logic programs with negation. Moreover, under the assumption that the programs have a finite number of rules, it was demonstrated in [RW05,GRW05] that the game is equivalent to the well-founded semantics of negation. In this paper we present work-in-progress towards demonstrating that the game of [RW05,GRW05] is equivalent to the well-founded semantics even in the case of programs that have a countably infinite number of rules. We argue however that in this case the proof of correctness has to be more involved. More specifically, in order to demonstrate that the game is correct one has to define a refined game in which each of the two players in his first move makes a bet in the form of a countable ordinal. Each ordinal can be considered as a kind of clock that imposes a "time limit" to the moves of the corresponding player. We argue that this refined game can be used to give the proof of correctness for the countably infinite case

Relational semantics of linear logic and higher-order model-checking

In this article, we develop a new and somewhat unexpected connection between higher-order model-checking and linear logic. Our starting point is the observation that once embedded in the relational semantics of linear logic, the Church encoding of any higher-order recursion scheme (HORS) comes together with a dual Church encoding of an alternating tree automata (ATA) of the same signature. Moreover, the interaction between the relational interpretations of the HORS and of the ATA identifies the set of accepting states of the tree automaton against the infinite tree generated by the recursion scheme. We show how to extend this result to alternating parity automata (APT) by introducing a parametric version of the exponential modality of linear logic, capturing the formal properties of colors (or priorities) in higher-order model-checking. We show in particular how to reunderstand in this way the type-theoretic approach to higher-order model-checking developed by Kobayashi and Ong. We briefly explain in the end of the paper how his analysis driven by linear logic results in a new and purely semantic proof of decidability of the formulas of the monadic second-order logic for higher-order recursion schemes.Comment: 24 pages. Submitte

Satisfiability Games for Branching-Time Logics

The satisfiability problem for branching-time temporal logics like CTL*, CTL and CTL+ has important applications in program specification and verification. Their computational complexities are known: CTL* and CTL+ are complete for doubly exponential time, CTL is complete for single exponential time. Some decision procedures for these logics are known; they use tree automata, tableaux or axiom systems. In this paper we present a uniform game-theoretic framework for the satisfiability problem of these branching-time temporal logics. We define satisfiability games for the full branching-time temporal logic CTL* using a high-level definition of winning condition that captures the essence of well-foundedness of least fixpoint unfoldings. These winning conditions form formal languages of \omega-words. We analyse which kinds of deterministic {\omega}-automata are needed in which case in order to recognise these languages. We then obtain a reduction to the problem of solving parity or B\"uchi games. The worst-case complexity of the obtained algorithms matches the known lower bounds for these logics. This approach provides a uniform, yet complexity-theoretically optimal treatment of satisfiability for branching-time temporal logics. It separates the use of temporal logic machinery from the use of automata thus preserving a syntactical relationship between the input formula and the object that represents satisfiability, i.e. a winning strategy in a parity or B\"uchi game. The games presented here work on a Fischer-Ladner closure of the input formula only. Last but not least, the games presented here come with an attempt at providing tool support for the satisfiability problem of complex branching-time logics like CTL* and CTL+

Visibly Linear Dynamic Logic

We introduce Visibly Linear Dynamic Logic (VLDL), which extends Linear Temporal Logic (LTL) by temporal operators that are guarded by visibly pushdown languages over finite words. In VLDL one can, e.g., express that a function resets a variable to its original value after its execution, even in the presence of an unbounded number of intermediate recursive calls. We prove that VLDL describes exactly the $\omega$-visibly pushdown languages. Thus it is strictly more expressive than LTL and able to express recursive properties of programs with unbounded call stacks. The main technical contribution of this work is a translation of VLDL into $\omega$-visibly pushdown automata of exponential size via one-way alternating jumping automata. This translation yields exponential-time algorithms for satisfiability, validity, and model checking. We also show that visibly pushdown games with VLDL winning conditions are solvable in triply-exponential time. We prove all these problems to be complete for their respective complexity classes.Comment: 25 Page