On the Parameterized Intractability of Monadic Second-Order Logic

One of Courcelle's celebrated results states that if C is a class of graphs of bounded tree-width, then model-checking for monadic second order logic (MSO_2) is fixed-parameter tractable (fpt) on C by linear time parameterized algorithms, where the parameter is the tree-width plus the size of the formula. An immediate question is whether this is best possible or whether the result can be extended to classes of unbounded tree-width. In this paper we show that in terms of tree-width, the theorem cannot be extended much further. More specifically, we show that if C is a class of graphs which is closed under colourings and satisfies certain constructibility conditions and is such that the tree-width of C is not bounded by \log^{84} n then MSO_2-model checking is not fpt unless SAT can be solved in sub-exponential time. If the tree-width of C is not poly-logarithmically bounded, then MSO_2-model checking is not fpt unless all problems in the polynomial-time hierarchy can be solved in sub-exponential time

Monadic second-order definable graph orderings

We study the question of whether, for a given class of finite graphs, one can define, for each graph of the class, a linear ordering in monadic second-order logic, possibly with the help of monadic parameters. We consider two variants of monadic second-order logic: one where we can only quantify over sets of vertices and one where we can also quantify over sets of edges. For several special cases, we present combinatorial characterisations of when such a linear ordering is definable. In some cases, for instance for graph classes that omit a fixed graph as a minor, the presented conditions are necessary and sufficient; in other cases, they are only necessary. Other graph classes we consider include complete bipartite graphs, split graphs, chordal graphs, and cographs. We prove that orderability is decidable for the so called HR-equational classes of graphs, which are described by equation systems and generalize the context-free languages

Order Invariance on Decomposable Structures

Order-invariant formulas access an ordering on a structure's universe, but the model relation is independent of the used ordering. Order invariance is frequently used for logic-based approaches in computer science. Order-invariant formulas capture unordered problems of complexity classes and they model the independence of the answer to a database query from low-level aspects of databases. We study the expressive power of order-invariant monadic second-order (MSO) and first-order (FO) logic on restricted classes of structures that admit certain forms of tree decompositions (not necessarily of bounded width). While order-invariant MSO is more expressive than MSO and, even, CMSO (MSO with modulo-counting predicates), we show that order-invariant MSO and CMSO are equally expressive on graphs of bounded tree width and on planar graphs. This extends an earlier result for trees due to Courcelle. Moreover, we show that all properties definable in order-invariant FO are also definable in MSO on these classes. These results are applications of a theorem that shows how to lift up definability results for order-invariant logics from the bags of a graph's tree decomposition to the graph itself.Comment: Accepted for LICS 201

On Descriptive Complexity, Language Complexity, and GB

We introduce $L^2_{K,P}$, a monadic second-order language for reasoning about trees which characterizes the strongly Context-Free Languages in the sense that a set of finite trees is definable in $L^2_{K,P}$ iff it is (modulo a projection) a Local Set---the set of derivation trees generated by a CFG. This provides a flexible approach to establishing language-theoretic complexity results for formalisms that are based on systems of well-formedness constraints on trees. We demonstrate this technique by sketching two such results for Government and Binding Theory. First, we show that {\em free-indexation\/}, the mechanism assumed to mediate a variety of agreement and binding relationships in GB, is not definable in $L^2_{K,P}$ and therefore not enforcible by CFGs. Second, we show how, in spite of this limitation, a reasonably complete GB account of English can be defined in $L^2_{K,P}$. Consequently, the language licensed by that account is strongly context-free. We illustrate some of the issues involved in establishing this result by looking at the definition, in $L^2_{K,P}$, of chains. The limitations of this definition provide some insight into the types of natural linguistic principles that correspond to higher levels of language complexity. We close with some speculation on the possible significance of these results for generative linguistics.Comment: To appear in Specifying Syntactic Structures, papers from the Logic, Structures, and Syntax workshop, Amsterdam, Sept. 1994. LaTeX source with nine included postscript figure

Regular Cost Functions, Part I: Logic and Algebra over Words

The theory of regular cost functions is a quantitative extension to the classical notion of regularity. A cost function associates to each input a non-negative integer value (or infinity), as opposed to languages which only associate to each input the two values "inside" and "outside". This theory is a continuation of the works on distance automata and similar models. These models of automata have been successfully used for solving the star-height problem, the finite power property, the finite substitution problem, the relative inclusion star-height problem and the boundedness problem for monadic-second order logic over words. Our notion of regularity can be -- as in the classical theory of regular languages -- equivalently defined in terms of automata, expressions, algebraic recognisability, and by a variant of the monadic second-order logic. These equivalences are strict extensions of the corresponding classical results. The present paper introduces the cost monadic logic, the quantitative extension to the notion of monadic second-order logic we use, and show that some problems of existence of bounds are decidable for this logic. This is achieved by introducing the corresponding algebraic formalism: stabilisation monoids.Comment: 47 page

Successor-Invariant First-Order Logic on Graphs with Excluded Topological Subgraphs

We show that the model-checking problem for successor-invariant first-order logic is fixed-parameter tractable on graphs with excluded topological subgraphs when parameterised by both the size of the input formula and the size of the exluded topological subgraph. Furthermore, we show that model-checking for order-invariant first-order logic is tractable on coloured posets of bounded width, parameterised by both the size of the input formula and the width of the poset. Our result for successor-invariant FO extends previous results for this logic on planar graphs (Engelmann et al., LICS 2012) and graphs with excluded minors (Eickmeyer et al., LICS 2013), further narrowing the gap between what is known for FO and what is known for successor-invariant FO. The proof uses Grohe and Marx's structure theorem for graphs with excluded topological subgraphs. For order-invariant FO we show that Gajarsk\'y et al.'s recent result for FO carries over to order-invariant FO

Order-Invariant MSO is Stronger than Counting MSO in the Finite

We compare the expressiveness of two extensions of monadic second-order logic (MSO) over the class of finite structures. The first, counting monadic second-order logic (CMSO), extends MSO with first-order modulo-counting quantifiers, allowing the expression of queries like ``the number of elements in the structure is even''. The second extension allows the use of an additional binary predicate, not contained in the signature of the queried structure, that must be interpreted as an arbitrary linear order on its universe, obtaining order-invariant MSO. While it is straightforward that every CMSO formula can be translated into an equivalent order-invariant MSO formula, the converse had not yet been settled. Courcelle showed that for restricted classes of structures both order-invariant MSO and CMSO are equally expressive, but conjectured that, in general, order-invariant MSO is stronger than CMSO. We affirm this conjecture by presenting a class of structures that is order-invariantly definable in MSO but not definable in CMSO.Comment: Revised version contributed to STACS 200