Adding modular predicates to first-order fragments

We investigate the decidability of the definability problem for fragments of first order logic over finite words enriched with modular predicates. Our approach aims toward the most generic statements that we could achieve, which successfully covers the quantifier alternation hierarchy of first order logic and some of its fragments. We obtain that deciding this problem for each level of the alternation hierarchy of both first order logic and its two-variable fragment when equipped with all regular numerical predicates is not harder than deciding it for the corresponding level equipped with only the linear order and the successor. For two-variable fragments we also treat the case of the signature containing only the order and modular predicates.Relying on some recent results, this proves the decidability for each level of the alternation hierarchy of the two-variable first order fragmentwhile in the case of the first order logic the question remains open for levels greater than two.The main ingredients of the proofs are syntactic transformations of first order formulas as well as the algebraic framework of finite categories

Separating regular languages with two quantifier alternations

We investigate a famous decision problem in automata theory: separation. Given a class of language C, the separation problem for C takes as input two regular languages and asks whether there exists a third one which belongs to C, includes the first one and is disjoint from the second. Typically, obtaining an algorithm for separation yields a deep understanding of the investigated class C. This explains why a lot of effort has been devoted to finding algorithms for the most prominent classes. Here, we are interested in classes within concatenation hierarchies. Such hierarchies are built using a generic construction process: one starts from an initial class called the basis and builds new levels by applying generic operations. The most famous one, the dot-depth hierarchy of Brzozowski and Cohen, classifies the languages definable in first-order logic. Moreover, it was shown by Thomas that it corresponds to the quantifier alternation hierarchy of first-order logic: each level in the dot-depth corresponds to the languages that can be defined with a prescribed number of quantifier blocks. Finding separation algorithms for all levels in this hierarchy is among the most famous open problems in automata theory. Our main theorem is generic: we show that separation is decidable for the level 3/2 of any concatenation hierarchy whose basis is finite. Furthermore, in the special case of the dot-depth, we push this result to the level 5/2. In logical terms, this solves separation for $\Sigma_3$: first-order sentences having at most three quantifier blocks starting with an existential one

Covering and separation for logical fragments with modular predicates

For every class $\mathscr{C}$ of word languages, one may associate a decision problem called $\mathscr{C}$-separation. Given two regular languages, it asks whether there exists a third language in $\mathscr{C}$ containing the first language, while being disjoint from the second one. Usually, finding an algorithm deciding $\mathscr{C}$-separation yields a deep insight on $\mathscr{C}$. We consider classes defined by fragments of first-order logic. Given such a fragment, one may often build a larger class by adding more predicates to its signature. In the paper, we investigate the operation of enriching signatures with modular predicates. Our main theorem is a generic transfer result for this construction. Informally, we show that when a logical fragment is equipped with a signature containing the successor predicate, separation for the stronger logic enriched with modular predicates reduces to separation for the original logic. This result actually applies to a more general decision problem, called the covering problem

Going higher in the First-order Quantifier Alternation Hierarchy on Words

We investigate the quantifier alternation hierarchy in first-order logic on finite words. Levels in this hierarchy are defined by counting the number of quantifier alternations in formulas. We prove that one can decide membership of a regular language to the levels $\mathcal{B}\Sigma_2$ (boolean combination of formulas having only 1 alternation) and $\Sigma_3$ (formulas having only 2 alternations beginning with an existential block). Our proof works by considering a deeper problem, called separation, which, once solved for lower levels, allows us to solve membership for higher levels

Separation for dot-depth two

The dot-depth hierarchy of Brzozowski and Cohen classifies the star-free languages of finite words. By a theorem of McNaughton and Papert, these are also the first-order definable languages. The dot-depth rose to prominence following the work of Thomas, who proved an exact correspondence with the quantifier alternation hierarchy of first-order logic: each level in the dot-depth hierarchy consists of all languages that can be defined with a prescribed number of quantifier blocks. One of the most famous open problems in automata theory is to settle whether the membership problem is decidable for each level: is it possible to decide whether an input regular language belongs to this level? Despite a significant research effort, membership by itself has only been solved for low levels. A recent breakthrough was achieved by replacing membership with a more general problem: separation. Given two input languages, one has to decide whether there exists a third language in the investigated level containing the first language and disjoint from the second. The motivation is that: (1) while more difficult, separation is more rewarding (2) it provides a more convenient framework (3) all recent membership algorithms are reductions to separation for lower levels. We present a separation algorithm for dot-depth two. While this is our most prominent application, our result is more general. We consider a family of hierarchies that includes the dot-depth: concatenation hierarchies. They are built via a generic construction process. One first chooses an initial class, the basis, which is the lowest level in the hierarchy. Further levels are built by applying generic operations. Our main theorem states that for any concatenation hierarchy whose basis is finite, separation is decidable for level one. In the special case of the dot-depth, this can be lifted to level two using previously known results

The Covering Problem

An important endeavor in computer science is to understand the expressive power of logical formalisms over discrete structures, such as words. Naturally, "understanding" is not a mathematical notion. This investigation requires therefore a concrete objective to capture this understanding. In the literature, the standard choice for this objective is the membership problem, whose aim is to find a procedure deciding whether an input regular language can be defined in the logic under investigation. This approach was cemented as the right one by the seminal work of Sch\"utzenberger, McNaughton and Papert on first-order logic and has been in use since then. However, membership questions are hard: for several important fragments, researchers have failed in this endeavor despite decades of investigation. In view of recent results on one of the most famous open questions, namely the quantifier alternation hierarchy of first-order logic, an explanation may be that membership is too restrictive as a setting. These new results were indeed obtained by considering more general problems than membership, taking advantage of the increased flexibility of the enriched mathematical setting. This opens a promising research avenue and efforts have been devoted at identifying and solving such problems for natural fragments. Until now however, these problems have been ad hoc, most fragments relying on a specific one. A unique new problem replacing membership as the right one is still missing. The main contribution of this paper is a suitable candidate to play this role: the Covering Problem. We motivate this problem with 3 arguments. First, it admits an elementary set theoretic formulation, similar to membership. Second, we are able to reexplain or generalize all known results with this problem. Third, we develop a mathematical framework and a methodology tailored to the investigation of this problem