research-article

Satisfiability of Modal Inclusion Logic: Lax and Strict Semantics

Authors:

Antti Kuusisto,

Heribert VollmerAuthors Info & Claims

ACM Transactions on Computational Logic (TOCL), Volume 21, Issue 1

Article No.: 7, Pages 1 - 18

https://doi.org/10.1145/3356043

Published: 27 September 2019 Publication History

Abstract

We investigate the computational complexity of the satisfiability problem of modal inclusion logic. We distinguish two variants of the problem: one for the strict and another one for the lax semantics. Both problems turn out to be EXPTIME-complete on general structures. Finally, we show how for a specific class of structures NEXPTIME-completeness for these problems under strict semantics can be achieved.

References

[1]

Samson Abramsky, Juha Kontinen, Jouko Väänänen, and Heribert Vollmer (Eds.). 2016. Dependence Logic, Theory and Applications. Springer.

[2]

Patrick Blackburn, Maarten de Rijke, and Yde Venema. 2001. Modal Logic. Cambridge University Press.

[3]

E. Clarke, E. A. Emerson, and A. Sistla. 1986. Automatic verification of finite-state concurrent systems using temporal logic specifications. ACM Trans. Prog. Lang. Syst. 8, 2 (1986), 244--263.

Digital Library

[4]

Johannes Ebbing and Peter Lohmann. 2012. Complexity of model checking for modal dependence logic. In Proceedings of the 38th Conference on Current Trends in Theory and Practice of Computer Science (SOFSEM’12) (Lecture Notes in Computer Science), Mária Bieliková, Gerhard Friedrich, Georg Gottlob, Stefan Katzenbeisser, and György Turán (Eds.), Vol. 7147. Springer, 226--237.

Digital Library

[5]

Pietro Galliani. 2012. Inclusion and exclusion dependencies in team semantics—On some logics of imperfect information. Ann. Pure Appl. Logic 163, 1 (2012), 68--84.

[6]

Pietro Galliani, Miika Hannula, and Juha Kontinen. 2013. Hierarchies in independence logic. In Proceedings of the Conference on Computer Science Logic (CSL’13) (LIPIcs), Simona Ronchi Della Rocca (Ed.), Vol. 23. Schloss Dagstuhl—Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik, 263--280.

[7]

Pietro Galliani and Lauri Hella. 2013. Inclusion logic and fixed point logic. In Proceedings of the Conference on Computer Science Logic (CSL’13) (LIPIcs), Simona Ronchi Della Rocca (Ed.), Vol. 23. Schloss Dagstuhl--Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik, 281--295.

[8]

Erich Grädel, Juha Kontinen, Jouko Väänänen, and Heribert Vollmer. 2015. Logics for dependence and independence (Dagstuhl seminar 15261). Dagstuhl Rep. 5, 6 (2015), 70--85.

[9]

Raymond Greenlaw, H. James Hoover, and Walter L. Ruzzo. 1995. Limits to Parallel Computation: P-completeness Theory. Oxford University Press, Inc., New York, NY.

Digital Library

[10]

Miika Hannula. 2016. The entailment problem in modal and propositional dependence logics. Retrieved from CoRR abs/1608.04301 (2016). http://arxiv.org/abs/1608.04301

[11]

Miika Hannula. 2017. Validity and entailment in modal and propositional dependence logics. In Proceedings of the 26th Conference on Computer Science Logic (CSL’17) (Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)), Valentin Goranko and Mads Dam (Eds.), Vol. 82. Schloss Dagstuhl--Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, Dagstuhl, Germany, 28:1--28:17.

[12]

Miika Hannula, Juha Kontinen, Jonni Virtema, and Heribert Vollmer. 2018. Complexity of propositional logics in team semantic. ACM Trans. Comput. Logic 19, 1, Article 2 (Jan. 2018), 14 pages.

Digital Library

[13]

Lauri Hella, Antti Kuusisto, Arne Meier, and Jonni Virtema. 2016. Model checking and validity in propositional and modal inclusion logics. Retrieved from CoRR abs/1609.06951 (2016).

[14]

Lauri Hella, Antti Kuusisto, Arne Meier, and Jonni Virtema. 2017. Model checking and validity in propositional and modal inclusion logics. In Proceedings of the 42nd International Symposium on Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science (MFCS’17) (LIPIcs), Kim G. Larsen, Hans L. Bodlaender, and Jean-François Raskin (Eds.), Vol. 83. Schloss Dagstuhl--Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik, 32:1--32:14.

[15]

Lauri Hella, Antti Kuusisto, Arne Meier, and Heribert Vollmer. 2015. Modal inclusion logic: Being lax is simpler than being strict. In Proceedings of the 40th International Symposium on Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science, (MFCS’15), Part I (Lecture Notes in Computer Science), Giuseppe F. Italiano, Giovanni Pighizzini, and Donald Sannella (Eds.), Vol. 9234. Springer, 281--292.

[16]

Edith Hemaspaandra. 1996. The price of universality. Notre Dame J. Form. Log. 37, 2 (1996), 174--203.

[17]

Neil Immerman. 1982. Relational queries computable in polynomial time (extended abstract). In Proceedings of the 14th ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, Harry R. Lewis, Barbara B. Simons, Walter A. Burkhard, and Lawrence H. Landweber (Eds.). ACM, 147--152.

Digital Library

[18]

Yevgeny Kazakov. 2004. A polynomial translation from the two-variable guarded fragment with number restrictions to the guarded fragment. In Proceedings of the 9th European Conference on Logics in Artificial Intelligence, (JELIA’04) (Lecture Notes in Computer Science), José Júlio Alferes and João Alexandre Leite (Eds.), Vol. 3229. Springer, 372--384.

[19]

Juha Kontinen, Julian-Steffen Müller, Henning Schnoor, and Heribert Vollmer. 2017. Modal independence logic. J. Log. Comput. 27, 5 (2017), 1333--1352.

[20]

Antti Kuusisto. 2015. A double team semantics for generalized quantifiers. J. Log., Lang. Inform. 24, 2 (2015), 149--191.

Digital Library

[21]

Richard E. Ladner. 1977. The computational complexity of provability in systems of modal propositional logic. SIAM J. Comput. 6, 3 (1977), 467--480.

Digital Library

[22]

Martin Lück. 2018. Canonical models and the complexity of modal team logic. In Proceedings of the 27th EACSL Conference on Computer Science Logic (CSL’18) (LIPIcs), Dan R. Ghica and Achim Jung (Eds.), Vol. 119. Schloss Dagstuhl--Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik, 30:1--30:23.

[23]

Julian-Steffen Müller. 2014. Satisfiability and Model Checking in Team Based Logics. Ph.D. Dissertation. Leibniz University of Hannover.

[24]

Gary Peterson, John Reif, and Salman Azhar. 2001. Lower bounds for multiplayer noncooperative games of incomplete information. Comput. Math. Appl. 41, 7 (2001), 957--992.

[25]

Ian Pratt-Hartmann. 2007. Complexity of the guarded two-variable fragment with counting quantifiers. J. Log. Comput. 17, 1 (2007), 133--155.

[26]

Philippe Schnoebelen. 2002. The complexity of temporal logic model checking. In Proceedings of the 4th Conference on Advances in Modal Logic, Philippe Balbiani, Nobu-Yuki Suzuki, Frank Wolter, and Michael Zakharyaschev (Eds.). King’s College Publications, 393--436.

[27]

Merlijn Sevenster. 2009. Model-theoretic and computational properties of modal dependence logic. J. Log. Comput. 19, 6 (2009), 1157--1173.

Digital Library

[28]

Jouko Väänänen. 2008. Modal dependence logic. In New Perspectives on Games and Interaction, K. Apt and R. van Rooij (Eds.). Amsterdam University Press, 237--254.

[29]

Jouko A. Väänänen. 2007. Dependence Logic—A New Approach to Independence Friendly Logic. London Mathematical Society student texts, Vol. 70. Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from http://www.cambridge.org/de/knowledge/isbn/item1164246/?site_locale=de_DE.

[30]

Jan van Eijck. 2014. Dynamic epistemic logics. In Johan van Benthem on Logic and Information Dynamics, Alexandru Baltag and Sonja Smets (Eds.). Springer, 175--202.

[31]

Moshe Y. Vardi. 1982. The complexity of relational query languages (extended abstract). In Proceedings of the 14th ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, Harry R. Lewis, Barbara B. Simons, Walter A. Burkhard, and Lawrence H. Landweber (Eds.). ACM, 137--146.

Digital Library

Cited By

Kontinen JMahmood YMeier AVollmer H(2024)Parameterized complexity of weighted team definabilityMathematical Structures in Computer Science10.1017/S0960129524000033(1-15)Online publication date: 20-Feb-2024
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0960129524000033
Hannula MHella L(2022)Complexity thresholds in inclusion logicInformation and Computation10.1016/j.ic.2021.104759287(104759)Online publication date: Sep-2022
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ic.2021.104759
Yang F(2022)Propositional union closed team logicsAnnals of Pure and Applied Logic10.1016/j.apal.2022.103102173:6(103102)Online publication date: Jun-2022
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apal.2022.103102

Index Terms

Satisfiability of Modal Inclusion Logic: Lax and Strict Semantics
1. Theory of computation
  1. Computational complexity and cryptography
    1. Complexity theory and logic
  2. Logic
    1. Modal and temporal logics

Recommendations

Labelled Sequent Calculi for Inquisitive Modal Logics
Logic, Language, Information, and Computation
Abstract
We present cut-free labelled sequent calculi for various systems of inquisitive modal logic, including inquisitive epistemic logic and inquisitive doxastic logic. Inquisitive modal logic extends the framework of standard modal logic with a ...
Hierarchies in Inclusion Logic with Lax Semantics

We study the expressive power of fragments of inclusion logic under the so-called lax team semantics. The fragments are defined either by restricting the number of universal quantifiers, the number of inclusion atoms, or the arity of inclusion atoms. We ...
Undefinability in Inquisitive Logic with Tensor
Logic, Rationality, and Interaction
Abstract
Logics based on team semantics, such as inquisitive logic and dependence logic, are not closed under uniform substitution. This leads to an interesting separation between expressive power and definability: it may be that an operator O can be added ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Transactions on Computational Logic

ACM Transactions on Computational Logic Volume 21, Issue 1

January 2020

271 pages

ISSN:1529-3785

EISSN:1557-945X

DOI:10.1145/3361969

Editor:
Orna Kupferman
School of Computer Science and Engineering, Hebrew University, Israel

Issue’s Table of Contents

Copyright © 2019 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 27 September 2019

Accepted: 01 August 2019

Revised: 01 March 2019

Received: 01 October 2017

Published in TOCL Volume 21, Issue 1

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article
Research
Refereed

Funding Sources

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
European Commission, Community Research and Development Service

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

3
Total Citations
View Citations
131
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)8
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1

Reflects downloads up to 30 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Kontinen JMahmood YMeier AVollmer H(2024)Parameterized complexity of weighted team definabilityMathematical Structures in Computer Science10.1017/S0960129524000033(1-15)Online publication date: 20-Feb-2024
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0960129524000033
Hannula MHella L(2022)Complexity thresholds in inclusion logicInformation and Computation10.1016/j.ic.2021.104759287(104759)Online publication date: Sep-2022
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ic.2021.104759
Yang F(2022)Propositional union closed team logicsAnnals of Pure and Applied Logic10.1016/j.apal.2022.103102173:6(103102)Online publication date: Jun-2022
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apal.2022.103102

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Article

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format.

Figures

Tables

Media

View Issue’s Table of Contents