On Expressiveness of Halpern-Shoham Logic and its Horn Fragments

Abstract: Halpern and Shoham\u27s modal logic of time intervals (HS in short) is an elegant and highly influential propositional interval-based logic. Its Horn fragments and their hybrid extensions have been recently intensively studied and successfully applied in real-world use cases. Detailed investigation of their decidability and computational complexity has been conducted, however, there has been significantly less research on their expressive power. In this paper we make a step towards filling this gap. We (1) show what time structures are definable in the language of HS, and (2) determine which HS fragments are capable of expressing: hybrid machinery, i.e., nominals and satisfaction operators, and somewhere, difference, and everywhere modal operators. These results enable us to classify HS Horn fragments according to their expressive power and to gain insight in the interplay between their decidability/computational complexity and expressiveness

Computational Complexity of a Core Fragment of Halpern-Shoham Logic

Halpern-Shoham logic (HS) is a highly expressive interval temporal logic but the satisfiability problem of its formulas is undecidable. The main goal in the research area is to introduce fragments of the logic which are of low computational complexity and of expressive power high enough for practical applications. Recently introduced syntactical restrictions imposed on formulas and semantical constraints put on models gave rise to tractable HS fragments for which prototypical real-world applications have already been proposed. One of such fragments is obtained by forbidding diamond modal operators and limiting formulas to the core form, i.e., the Horn form with at most one literal in the antecedent. The fragment was known to be NL-hard and in P but no tight results were known. In the paper we prove its P-completeness in the case where punctual intervals are allowed and the timeline is dense. Importantly, the fragment is not referential, i.e., it does not allow us to express nominals (which label intervals) and satisfaction operators (which enables us to refer to intervals by their labels). We show that by adding nominals and satisfaction operators to the fragment we reach NP-completeness whenever the timeline is dense or the interpretation of modal operators is weakened (excluding the case when punctual intervals are disallowed and the timeline is discrete). Moreover, we prove that in the case of language containing nominals but not satisfaction operators, the fragment is still NP-complete over dense timelines

Horn fragments of the Halpern-Shoham Interval Temporal Logic

We investigate the satisfiability problem for Horn fragments of the Halpern-Shoham interval temporal logic depending on the type (box or diamond) of the interval modal operators, the type of the underlying linear order (discrete or dense), and the type of semantics for the interval relations (reflexive or irreflexive). For example, we show that satisfiability of Horn formulas with diamonds is undecidable for any type of linear orders and semantics. On the contrary, satisfiability of Horn formulas with boxes is tractable over both discrete and dense orders under the reflexive semantics and over dense orders under the irreflexive semantics but becomes undecidable over discrete orders under the irreflexive semantics. Satisfiability of binary Horn formulas with both boxes and diamonds is always undecidable under the irreflexive semantics

Interval vs. Point Temporal Logic Model Checking: an Expressiveness Comparison

Model checking is a powerful method widely explored in formal verification to check the (state-transition) model of a system against desired properties of its behaviour. Classically, properties are expressed by formulas of a temporal logic, such as LTL, CTL, and CTL*. These logics are "point-wise" interpreted, as they describe how the system evolves state-by-state. On the contrary, Halpern and Shoham\u27s interval temporal logic (HS) is "interval-wise" interpreted, thus allowing one to naturally express properties of computation stretches, spanning a sequence of states, or properties involving temporal aggregations, which are inherently "interval-based". In this paper, we study the expressiveness of HS in model checking, in comparison with that of the standard logics LTL, CTL, and CTL*. To this end, we consider HS endowed with three semantic variants: the state-based semantics, introduced by Montanari et al., which allows branching in the past and in the future, the linear-past semantics, allowing branching only in the future, and the linear semantics, disallowing branching. These variants are compared, as for their expressiveness, among themselves and to standard temporal logics, getting a complete picture. In particular, HS with linear (resp., linear-past) semantics is proved to be equivalent to LTL (resp., finitary CTL*)

Interval vs. Point Temporal Logic Model Checking: an Expressiveness Comparison

In recent years, model checking with interval temporal logics is emerging as a viable alternative to model checking with standard point-based temporal logics, such as LTL, CTL, CTL*, and the like. The behavior of the system is modeled by means of (finite) Kripke structures, as usual. However, while temporal logics which are interpreted \u201cpoint-wise\u201d describe how the system evolves state-by-state, and predicate properties of system states, those which are interpreted \u201cinterval-wise\u201d express properties of computation stretches, spanning a sequence of states. A proposition letter is assumed to hold over a computation stretch (interval) if and only if it holds over each component state (homogeneity assumption). A natural question arises: is there any advantage in replacing points by intervals as the primary temporal entities, or is it just a matter of taste? In this article, we study the expressiveness of Halpern and Shoham\u2019s interval temporal logic (HS) in model checking, in comparison with those of LTL, CTL, and CTL*. To this end, we consider three semantic variants of HS: the state-based one, introduced by Montanari et al. in [30, 34], that allows time to branch both in the past and in the future, the computation-tree-based one, that allows time to branch in the future only, and the trace-based variant, that disallows time to branch. These variants are compared among themselves and to the aforementioned standard logics, getting a complete picture. In particular, we show that HS with trace-based semantics is equivalent to LTL (but at least exponentially more succinct), HS with computation-tree-based semantics is equivalent to finitary CTL*, and HS with state-based semantics is incomparable with all of them (LTL, CTL, and CTL*)

Crossing the Undecidability Border with Extensions of Propositional Neighborhood Logic over Natural Numbers

Propositional Neighborhood Logic (PNL) is an interval temporal logic featuring two modalities corresponding to the relations of right and left neighborhood between two intervals on a linear order (in terms of Allen's relations, meets and met by). Recently, it has been shown that PNL interpreted over several classes of linear orders, including natural numbers, is decidable (NEXPTIME-complete) and that some of its natural extensions preserve decidability. Most notably, this is the case with PNL over natural numbers extended with a limited form of metric constraints and with the future fragment of PNL extended with modal operators corresponding to Allen's relations begins, begun by, and before. This paper aims at demonstrating that PNL and its metric version MPNL, interpreted over natural numbers, are indeed very close to the border with undecidability, and even relatively weak extensions of them become undecidable. In particular, we show that (i) the addition of binders on integer variables ranging over interval lengths makes the resulting hybrid extension of MPNL undecidable, and (ii) a very weak first-order extension of the future fragment of PNL, obtained by replacing proposition letters by a restricted subclass of first-order formulae where only one variable is allowed, is undecidable (in contrast with the decidability of similar first-order extensions of point-based temporal logics)

Temporalized logics and automata for time granularity

Suitable extensions of the monadic second-order theory of k successors have been proposed in the literature to capture the notion of time granularity. In this paper, we provide the monadic second-order theories of downward unbounded layered structures, which are infinitely refinable structures consisting of a coarsest domain and an infinite number of finer and finer domains, and of upward unbounded layered structures, which consist of a finest domain and an infinite number of coarser and coarser domains, with expressively complete and elementarily decidable temporal logic counterparts. We obtain such a result in two steps. First, we define a new class of combined automata, called temporalized automata, which can be proved to be the automata-theoretic counterpart of temporalized logics, and show that relevant properties, such as closure under Boolean operations, decidability, and expressive equivalence with respect to temporal logics, transfer from component automata to temporalized ones. Then, we exploit the correspondence between temporalized logics and automata to reduce the task of finding the temporal logic counterparts of the given theories of time granularity to the easier one of finding temporalized automata counterparts of them.Comment: Journal: Theory and Practice of Logic Programming Journal Acronym: TPLP Category: Paper for Special Issue (Verification and Computational Logic) Submitted: 18 March 2002, revised: 14 Januari 2003, accepted: 5 September 200

On Sub-Propositional Fragments of Modal Logic

In this paper, we consider the well-known modal logics $\mathbf{K}$, $\mathbf{T}$, $\mathbf{K4}$, and $\mathbf{S4}$, and we study some of their sub-propositional fragments, namely the classical Horn fragment, the Krom fragment, the so-called core fragment, defined as the intersection of the Horn and the Krom fragments, plus their sub-fragments obtained by limiting the use of boxes and diamonds in clauses. We focus, first, on the relative expressive power of such languages: we introduce a suitable measure of expressive power, and we obtain a complex hierarchy that encompasses all fragments of the considered logics. Then, after observing the low expressive power, in particular, of the Horn fragments without diamonds, we study the computational complexity of their satisfiability problem, proving that, in general, it becomes polynomial

Combining Spatial and Temporal Logics: Expressiveness vs. Complexity

In this paper, we construct and investigate a hierarchy of spatio-temporal formalisms that result from various combinations of propositional spatial and temporal logics such as the propositional temporal logic PTL, the spatial logics RCC-8, BRCC-8, S4u and their fragments. The obtained results give a clear picture of the trade-off between expressiveness and computational realisability within the hierarchy. We demonstrate how different combining principles as well as spatial and temporal primitives can produce NP-, PSPACE-, EXPSPACE-, 2EXPSPACE-complete, and even undecidable spatio-temporal logics out of components that are at most NP- or PSPACE-complete