arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv 2201.07116cs.LO
收藏

鲁棒计算树逻辑

Robust Computation Tree Logic

Satya Prakash Nayak, Daniel Neider, Rajarshi Roy, Martin Zimmermann

AI总结:

针对分支时间逻辑缺乏鲁棒语义的问题,提出采用多值语义的 rCTL 与 rCTL*,在保持或增强表达能力的同时,使模型检测、可满足性和综合复杂度不增加。

摘要:

人们普遍认为,每个系统都应当具备鲁棒性,即对环境假设的“小”违背应当只会导致对系统保证的“小”违背,但如何将这种直觉在数学上精确化却尚不明确。尽管已有大量工作致力于为线性时序逻辑(LTL)提供鲁棒性概念,但诸如计算树逻辑(CTL)和 CTL* 等分支时间逻辑在这方面受到的关注较少。为弥补这一不足,我们提出了 CTL 和 CTL* 的“鲁棒”扩展,并将其命名为鲁棒 CTL(rCTL)和鲁棒 CTL*(rCTL*)。这两种扩展在语法上与其父逻辑相似,但采用多值语义来区分对规范的“大”违背和“小”违背。我们证明,rCTL 的多值语义使其比 CTL 更具表达能力,而 rCTL* 的表达能力与 CTL* 相同。此外,我们还证明,rCTL 和 rCTL* 的模型检测问题、可满足性问题和综合问题与其非鲁棒对应逻辑具有相同的渐近复杂度,这意味着可以免费为分支时间逻辑添加鲁棒性。

英文摘要:

It is widely accepted that every system should be robust in that ``small'' violations of environment assumptions should lead to ``small'' violations of system guarantees, but it is less clear how to make this intuition mathematically precise. While significant efforts have been devoted to providing notions of robustness for Linear Temporal Logic (LTL), branching-time logics, such as Computation Tree Logic (CTL) and CTL*, have received less attention in this regard. To address this shortcoming, we develop ``robust'' extensions of CTL and CTL*, which we name robust CTL (rCTL) and robust CTL* (rCTL*). Both extensions are syntactically similar to their parent logics but employ multi-valued semantics to distinguish between ``large'' and ``small'' violations of the specification. We show that the multi-valued semantics of rCTL make it more expressive than CTL, while rCTL* is as expressive as CTL*. Moreover, we show that the model checking problem, the satisfiability problem, and the synthesis problem for rCTL and rCTL* have the same asymptotic complexity as their non-robust counterparts, implying that robustness can be added to branching-time logics for free.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑