First-Order vs. Second-Order Encodings for LTLf-to-Automata Translation

被引:15
|
作者
Zhu, Shufang [1 ]
Pu, Geguang [1 ]
Vardi, Moshe Y. [2 ]
机构
[1] East China Normal Univ, Shanghai, Peoples R China
[2] Rice Univ, Houston, TX USA
来源
THEORY AND APPLICATIONS OF MODELS OF COMPUTATION, TAMC 2019 | 2019年 / 11436卷
关键词
MODEL CHECKING;
D O I
10.1007/978-3-030-14812-6_43
中图分类号
TP18 [人工智能理论];
学科分类号
081104 ; 0812 ; 0835 ; 1405 ;
摘要
Translating formulas of Linear Temporal Logic (LTL) over finite traces, or LTLf, to symbolic Deterministic Finite Automata (DFA) plays an important role not only in LTLf synthesis, but also in synthesis for Safety LTL formulas. The translation is enabled by using MONA, a powerful tool for symbolic, BDD-based, DFA construction from logic specifications. Recent works used a first-order encoding of LTLf formulas to translate LTLf to First Order Logic (FOL), which is then fed to MONA to get the symbolic DFA. This encoding was shown to perform well, but other encodings have not been studied. Specifically, the natural question of whether second-order encoding, which has significantly simpler quantificational structure, can outperform first-order encoding remained open. In this paper we address this challenge and study second-order encodings for LTLf formulas. We first introduce a specific MSO encoding that captures the semantics of LTLf in a natural way and prove its correctness. We then explore is a Compact MSO encoding, which benefits from automata-theoretic minimization, thus suggesting a possible practical advantage. To that end, we propose a formalization of symbolic DFA in second-order logic, thus developing a novel connection between BDDs and MSO. We then show by empirical evaluations that the first-order encoding does perform better than both second-order encodings. The conclusion is that first-order encoding is a better choice than second-order encoding in LTLf-to-Automata translation.
引用
收藏
页码:684 / 705
页数:22
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Second-Order Recursions of First-Order Cybernetics: An "Experimental Epistemology"
    Jeon, Won
    OPEN PHILOSOPHY, 2022, 5 (01) : 381 - 395
  • [32] The evaluation of first-order substitution is monadic second-order compatible
    Courcelle, B
    Knapik, T
    THEORETICAL COMPUTER SCIENCE, 2002, 281 (1-2) : 177 - 206
  • [33] First-order or second-order kinetics? A Monte Carlo answer
    Tellinghuisen, J
    JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL EDUCATION, 2005, 82 (11) : 1709 - 1714
  • [34] Are there separate first-order and second-order mechanisms for orientation discrimination?
    Morgan, MJ
    Mason, AJS
    Baldassi, S
    VISION RESEARCH, 2000, 40 (13) : 1751 - 1763
  • [35] First-order and second-order configural influences on facial expressions
    Wink, B
    Cook, F
    Johnston, RA
    Jones, CA
    PERCEPTION, 2004, 33 : 105 - 105
  • [36] First-order versus second-order phase transformation in AuZn
    Sanati, M.
    Albers, R. C.
    Lookman, T.
    Saxena, A.
    PHYSICAL REVIEW B, 2013, 88 (02)
  • [37] Is consciousness first-order?! Processing of second-order stimuli in blindsight
    Trevethan, CT
    Sahraie, A
    PERCEPTION, 2005, 34 : 147 - 147
  • [38] Motion aftereffect of combined first-order and second-order motion
    van der Smagt, MJ
    Verstraten, FAJ
    Vaessen, EBP
    van Londen, T
    van de Grind, WA
    PERCEPTION, 1999, 28 (11) : 1397 - 1411
  • [39] A comparison of first-order and second-order transparency thresholds in stereopsis
    Langley, K.
    Fleet, D. J.
    Hibbard, P. B.
    PERCEPTION, 1998, 27 : 102 - 102
  • [40] Where First-Order and Monadic Second-Order Logic Coincide
    Elberfeld, Michael
    Grohe, Martin
    Tantau, Till
    ACM TRANSACTIONS ON COMPUTATIONAL LOGIC, 2016, 17 (04)