3 research outputs found

    From Quantifier Depth to Quantifier Number: Separating Structures with k Variables

    Full text link
    Given two nn-element structures, A\mathcal{A} and B\mathcal{B}, which can be distinguished by a sentence of kk-variable first-order logic (Lk\mathcal{L}^k), what is the minimum f(n)f(n) such that there is guaranteed to be a sentence ϕ∈Lk\phi \in \mathcal{L}^k with at most f(n)f(n) quantifiers, such that A⊨ϕ\mathcal{A} \models \phi but B⊭ϕ\mathcal{B} \not \models \phi? We present various results related to this question obtained by using the recently introduced QVT games. In particular, we show that when we limit the number of variables, there can be an exponential gap between the quantifier depth and the quantifier number needed to separate two structures. Through the lens of this question, we will highlight some difficulties that arise in analysing the QVT game and some techniques which can help to overcome them. As a consequence, we show that Lk+1\mathcal{L}^{k+1} is exponentially more succinct than Lk\mathcal{L}^{k}. We also show, in the setting of the existential-positive fragment, how to lift quantifier depth lower bounds to quantifier number lower bounds. This leads to almost tight bounds.Comment: 53 pages, 8 figures; added new result on the relative succinctness of finite variable logi

    Structured d-DNNF Is Not Closed Under Negation

    Full text link
    Both structured d-DNNF and SDD can be exponentially more succinct than OBDD. Moreover, SDD is essentially as tractable as OBDD. But this has left two important open questions. Firstly, does OBDD support more tractable transformations than structured d-DNNF? And secondly, is structured d-DNNF more succinct than SDD? In this paper, we answer both questions in the affirmative. For the first question we show that, unlike OBDD, structured d-DNNF does not support polytime negation, disjunction, or existential quantification operations. As a corollary, we deduce that there are functions with an equivalent polynomial-sized structured d-DNNF but with no such representation as an SDD, thus answering the second question. We also lift this second result to arithmetic circuits (AC) to show a succinctness gap between PSDD and the monotone AC analogue to structured d-DNNF.Comment: 9 pages, 2 figure

    A Dichotomy for Succinct Representations of Homomorphisms

    Get PDF
    corecore