Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T22:13:38.216Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

SYMMETRIES IN MODAL LOGICS

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 January 2016

CARLOS ARECES  and
EZEQUIEL ORBE
CARLOS ARECES
Affiliation:
CONICET - FAMAF UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL DE CORDOBA HAYA DE LA TORRE S/N, CÓRDOBA, 5000, ARGENTINA, OFFICE 284E-mail: carlos.areces@gmail.comURL: http://cs.famaf.unc.edu.ar/∼careces
EZEQUIEL ORBE
Affiliation:
CONICET - FAMAF UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL DE CORDOBA HAYA DE LA TORRE S/N, CÓRDOBA, 5000, ARGENTINA, OFFICE 293E-mail: orbe@famaf.unc.edu.arURL: http://cs.famaf.unc.edu.ar/∼ezequiel
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this paper we develop the theoretical foundations to exploit symmetries in modal logics. We generalize the notion of symmetries of propositional formulas in conjunctive normal form to modal formulas using the framework provided by coinductive modal models introduced in [5]. Hence, the results apply to a wide class of modal logics including, for example, hybrid logics. We present two graph constructions that enable the reduction of symmetry detection in modal formulas to the graph automorphism detection problem, and we evaluate the graph constructions on modal benchmarks.

Keywords

03B4568T1568T20automated reasoningmodal logicssymmetries
Type
Articles
Information
Bulletin of Symbolic Logic , Volume 21 , Issue 4 , December 2015 , pp. 373 - 401
Copyright
Copyright © The Association for Symbolic Logic 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Aloul, F., Markov, I., and Sakallah, K., Shatter: Efficient symmetry-breaking for Boolean satisfiability, Proceedings of the 40th Annual Design Automation Conference, ACM, 2003, pp. 836–839.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aloul, F., Ramani, A., Markov, I., and Sakallah, K., Solving difficult instances of Boolean satisfiability in the presence of symmetry. IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems, vol. 22 (2003), no. 9, pp. 1117–1137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aloul, F., Sakallah, K., and Markov, I., Efficient symmetry breaking for Boolean satisfiability. IEEE Transactions on Computers, vol. 55 (2006), no. 5, pp. 549–558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Areces, C., Gennari, R., Heguiabehere, J., and de Rijke, M., Tree-based heuristics in modal theorem proving, Proceedings of ECAI 2000 (Berlin, Germany), 2000, pp. 199–203.Google Scholar
Areces, C. and Gorín, D., Coinductive models and normal forms for modal logics (or how we learned to stop worrying and love coinduction). Journal of Applied Logic, vol. 8 (2010), no. 4, pp. 305–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Areces, C. and Orbe, E., Symmetric blocking, Theoretical Computer Science (Areces, Carlos and Orbe, Ezequiel, editors), vol. 606, Logical and Semantic Frameworks with Applications, pp. 25–41, 2015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Areces, C. and ten Cate, B., Hybrid logics, Handbook of Modal Logics (Blackburn, P., Wolter, F., and van Benthem, J., editors), Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2006, pp. 821–868.Google Scholar
Audemard, G., Cimatti, A., Kornilowicz, A., and Sebastiani, R., Bounded model checking for timed systems, Formal Techniques for Networked and Distributed Sytems (FORTE 2002), Springer, Heidelberg, 2002, pp. 243–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Audemard, G., Jabbour, S., and Sais, L., Efficient symmetry breaking predicates for Quantified Boolean Formulae, Proceedings of Workshop on Symmetry and Constraint Satisfaction Problems - Affiliated to CP (SymCon) (Providence, RI, USA) (Benhamou, Belaid, Choueiry, Berthe Y., and Hnich, Brahim, editors), 2007.Google Scholar
Audemard, G., Jabbour, S., and Sais, L., Symmetry Breaking in Quantified Boolean Formulae, Proceedings of the 20th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI 2007) (Hyderabad, India) (Veloso, Manuela M., editor), 2007, pp. 2262–2267.Google Scholar
Audemard, G., Mazure, B., and Sais, L., Dealing with symmetries in Quantified Boolean Formulas, The Seventh International Conference on Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing (SAT 2004) Online Proceedings (Vancouver, BC, Canada), 2004, pp. 257–262.Google Scholar
Balsiger, P., Heuerding, A., and Schwendimann, S., A benchmark method for the propositional modal logics K, KT, S4. Journal of Automated Reasoning, vol. 24 (2000), no. 3, pp. 297–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benhamou, B., Nabhani, T., Ostrowski, R., and Saidi, M., Enhancing clause learning by symmetry in SAT solvers, Proceedings of the 22nd IEEE International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence (ICTAI 2010) (Arras, France), vol. 1, IEEE Computer Society, 2010, pp. 329–335.Google Scholar
Benhamou, B. and Sais, L., Theoretical study of symmetries in propositional calculus and applications, Proceedings of 11th International Conference on Automated Deduction (CADE-11) (Saratoga Springs, NY, USA) (Kapur, Deepak, editor), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 607, Springer, 1992, pp. 281–294.Google Scholar
Benhamou, B. and Sais, L., Tractability through symmetries in propositional calculus. Journal of Automated Reasoning, vol. 12 (1994), no. 1, pp. 89–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blackburn, P., de Rijke, M., and Venema, Y., Modal Logic, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blackburn, P., van Benthem, J., and Wolter, F., Handbook of Modal Logic, Studies in Logic and Practical Reasoning, vol. 3, Elsevier, New York, NY, USA, 2006.Google Scholar
Bošnački, D., Dams, D., and Holenderski, L., Symmetric Spin. International Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer, vol. 4 (2002), no. 1, pp. 92–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, C., Finkelstein, L., and Purdom, P. Jr, Backtrack searching in the presence of symmetry, Applied Algebra, Algebraic Algorithms and Error-correcting Codes, Springer, Berlin, 1989, pp. 99–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, E., Enders, R., Filkorn, T., and Jha, S., Exploiting symmetry in temporal logic model checking, Formal Methods in System Design, vol. 9 (1996), no. 1-2, pp. 77–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, D., Jeavons, P., r Jefferson, C., Petrie, K., and Smith, B., Symmetry definitions for constraint satisfaction problems, Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming, Springer, 2005, pp. 17–31.Google Scholar
Cohen, M., Dam, M., Lomuscio, A., and Qu, H., A symmetry reduction technique for model checking temporal-epistemic logic, Proceedings of the 21st International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI 2009) (Pasadena, California, USA) (Boutilier, Craig, editor), 2009, pp. 721–726.Google Scholar
Crawford, J., A theoretical analysis of reasoning by symmetry in first-order logic, Proceedings of AAAI Workshop on Tractable Reasoning (San Jose, CA), 1992, pp. 17–22.Google Scholar
Crawford, J., Ginsberg, M., Luks, E., and Roy, A., Symmetry-breaking predicates for search problems, Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR’96) (Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA) (Carlucci Aiello, Luigia, Doyle, Jon, and Shapiro, Stuart C., editors), Morgan Kaufmann, 1996, pp. 148–159.Google Scholar
Darvas, G., Symmetry. Cultural-historical and Ontological Aspects of Science-Arts Relations. The Natural and Man-Made World in an Interdisciplinary Approach, Birkhäuser, Basel, 2007.Google Scholar
Déharbe, D., Fontaine, P., Merz, S., and Woltzenlogel Paleo, B., Exploiting symmetry in SMT problems, Proceedings of 23rd International Conference on Automated Deduction (CADE-23) (Wroclaw, Poland) (Bjørner, Nikolaj and Sofronie-Stokkermans, Viorica, editors), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 6803, Springer, 2011, pp. 222–236.Google Scholar
Donaldson, A., Automatic techniques for detecting and exploiting symmetry in model checking, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Glasgow, 2007.Google Scholar
Donaldson, A. and Miller, A., Automatic symmetry detection for model checking using computational group theory, Proceedings of Formal Methods, International Symposium of Formal Methods Europe (FM 2005) (Newcastle, UK) (Fitzgerald, John S., Hayes, Ian J., and Tarlecki, Andrzej, editors), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3582, Springer, 2005, pp. 481–496.Google Scholar
Fox, M. and Long, D., The detection and exploitation of symmetry in planning problems, Proceedings of the Sixteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI 99) (Stockholm, Sweden) (Dean, Thomas, editor), Morgan Kaufmann, 1999, pp. 956–961.Google Scholar
Fox, M. and Long, D., Extending the exploitation of symmetries in planning, Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence Planning Systems (AIPS) (Toulouse, France) (Ghallab, Malik, Hertzberg, Joachim, and Traverso, Paolo, editors), AAAI, 2002, pp. 83–91.Google Scholar
Fraleigh, J. and Katz, V., A First Course in Abstract Algebra, Addison-Wesley World Student Series, Addison-Wesley, 2003.Google Scholar
Gent, I., Petrie, K., and Puget, J., Symmetry in constraint programming, Handbook of Constraint Programming, Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2006, pp. 329–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrison, J., Without loss of generality, Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Theorem Proving in Higher Order Logics (Munich, Germany) (Berghofer, Stefan, Nipkow, Tobias, Urban, Christian, and Wenzel, Makarius, editors), LNCS, vol. 5674, Springer-Verlag, 2009, pp. 43–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ip, C. and Dill, D., Better verification through symmetry. Formal Methods in System Design, vol. 9 (1996), no. 1–2, pp. 41–75.Google Scholar
Junttila, T. and Kaski, P., Engineering an efficient canonical labeling tool for large and sparse graphs, Proceedings of the Workshop on Algorithm Engineering and Experiments (ALENEX 2007) (New Orleans, Louisiana, USA), vol. 7, 2007, pp. 135–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krishnamurthy, B., Short proofs for tricky formulas. Acta Informatica, vol. 22 (1985), no. 3, pp. 253–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Margot, F., Pruning by isomorphism in branch-and-cut. Mathematical Programming, vol. 94 (2002), no. 1, pp. 71–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Margot, F., Exploiting orbits in symmetric ILP. Mathematical Programming, vol. 98 (2003), no. 1–3, pp. 3–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, A., Donaldson, A., and Calder, M., Symmetry in temporal logic model checking. ACM Computing Surveys, vol. 38 (2006), no. 3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patel-Schneider, P. and Sebastiani, R., A new general method to generate random modal formulae for testing decision procedures. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, vol. 18 (2003), pp. 351–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roe, K., The heuristic theorem prover: Yet another SMT modulo theorem prover, Proceedings of 18th International Conference on Computer Aided Verification (CAV 2006) (Seattle, WA, USA) (Ball, Thomas and Jones, Robert B., editors), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4144, Springer, Berlin, 2006, pp. 467–470.Google Scholar
Sakallah, K., Symmetry and satisfiability, Handbook of Satisfiability (Biere, A., Heule, M., van Maaren, H., and Walsh, T., editors), Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, vol. 185, IOS Press, February 2009, pp. 289–338.Google Scholar
Sistla, A., Gyuris, V., and Emerson, E., SMC: A symmetry-based model checker for verification of safety and liveness properties. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM), vol. 9 (2000), no. 2, pp. 133–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar