Generalizing input-driven languages: theoretical and practical benefits

Regular languages (RL) are the simplest family in Chomsky's hierarchy. Thanks to their simplicity they enjoy various nice algebraic and logic properties that have been successfully exploited in many application fields. Practically all of their related problems are decidable, so that they support automatic verification algorithms. Also, they can be recognized in real-time. Context-free languages (CFL) are another major family well-suited to formalize programming, natural, and many other classes of languages; their increased generative power w.r.t. RL, however, causes the loss of several closure properties and of the decidability of important problems; furthermore they need complex parsing algorithms. Thus, various subclasses thereof have been defined with different goals, spanning from efficient, deterministic parsing to closure properties, logic characterization and automatic verification techniques. Among CFL subclasses, so-called structured ones, i.e., those where the typical tree-structure is visible in the sentences, exhibit many of the algebraic and logic properties of RL, whereas deterministic CFL have been thoroughly exploited in compiler construction and other application fields. After surveying and comparing the main properties of those various language families, we go back to operator precedence languages (OPL), an old family through which R. Floyd pioneered deterministic parsing, and we show that they offer unexpected properties in two fields so far investigated in totally independent ways: they enable parsing parallelization in a more effective way than traditional sequential parsers, and exhibit the same algebraic and logic properties so far obtained only for less expressive language families

Real-time and Probabilistic Temporal Logics: An Overview

Over the last two decades, there has been an extensive study on logical formalisms for specifying and verifying real-time systems. Temporal logics have been an important research subject within this direction. Although numerous logics have been introduced for the formal specification of real-time and complex systems, an up to date comprehensive analysis of these logics does not exist in the literature. In this paper we analyse real-time and probabilistic temporal logics which have been widely used in this field. We extrapolate the notions of decidability, axiomatizability, expressiveness, model checking, etc. for each logic analysed. We also provide a comparison of features of the temporal logics discussed

A First-Order Complete Temporal Logic for Structured Context-Free Languages

The problem of model checking procedural programs has fostered much research towards the definition of temporal logics for reasoning on context-free structures. The most notable of such results are temporal logics on Nested Words, such as CaRet and NWTL. Recently, the logic OPTL was introduced, based on the class of Operator Precedence Languages (OPLs), more powerful than Nested Words. We define the new OPL-based logic POTL and prove its FO-completeness. POTL improves on NWTL by enabling the formulation of requirements involving pre/post-conditions, stack inspection, and others in the presence of exception-like constructs. It improves on OPTL too, which instead we show not to be FO-complete; it also allows to express more easily stack inspection and function-local properties. In a companion paper we report a model checking procedure for POTL and experimental results based on a prototype tool developed therefor. For completeness a short summary of this complementary result is provided in this paper too.Comment: Partially supersedes arXiv:1910.0932

A Model Checker for Operator Precedence Languages

The problem of extending model checking from finite state machines to procedural programs has fostered much research toward the definition of temporal logics for reasoning on context-free structures. The most notable of such results are temporal logics on Nested Words, such as CaRet and NWTL. Recently, Precedence Oriented Temporal Logic (POTL) has been introduced to specify and prove properties of programs coded trough an Operator Precedence Language (OPL). POTL is complete w.r.t. the FO restriction of the MSO logic previously defined as a logic fully equivalent to OPL. POTL increases NWTL's expressive power in a perfectly parallel way as OPLs are more powerful that nested words.In this article, we produce a model checker, named POMC, for OPL programs to prove properties expressed in POTL. To the best of our knowledge, POMC is the first implemented and openly available model checker for proving tree-structured properties of recursive procedural programs. We also report on the experimental evaluation we performed on POMC on a nontrivial benchmark

Temporal Logic and Model Checking for Operator Precedence Languages

In the last decades much research effort has been devoted to extending the success of model checking from the traditional field of finite state machines and various versions of temporal logics to suitable subclasses of context-free languages and appropriate extensions of temporal logics. To the best of our knowledge such attempts only covered structured languages, i.e. languages whose structure is immediately "visible" in their sentences, such as tree-languages or visibly pushdown ones. In this paper we present a new temporal logic suitable to express and automatically verify properties of operator precedence languages. This "historical" language family has been recently proved to enjoy fundamental algebraic and logic properties that make it suitable for model checking applications yet breaking the barrier of visible-structure languages (in fact the original motivation of its inventor Floyd was just to support efficient parsing, i.e. building the "hidden syntax tree" of language sentences). We prove that our logic is at least as expressive as analogous logics defined for visible pushdown languages yet covering a much more powerful family; we design a procedure that, given a formula in our logic builds an automaton recognizing the sentences satisfying the formula, whose size is at most exponential in the length of the formula.Comment: In Proceedings GandALF 2018, arXiv:1809.0241