Henning Schnoor

Bases for Boolean co-clones

The complexity of various problems in connection with Boolean constraints, like, for example, quantified Boolean constraint satisfaction, have been studied recently. Depending on what types of constraints may be used, the complexity of such problems varies. A very interesting observation of the recent past has been that the thus derived classification of constraints can be explained with the help of universal algebra. More precisely, the difficulty of such a constraint problem often depends on the co-clone the constraints are from. A co-clone is a set of Boolean relations that is closed under very natural closure operations. Nearly all these co-clones can be generated by said operators out of a finite set of relations, a so-called base. Knowing a, preferably simple, base for each co-clone can therefore be of great value when studying the complexity of Boolean constraint problems, since this knowledge reduces the infinitely many cases of equivalent problems to a single one--the constraint satisfaction problem for this base. In this paper we give a finite and simple base for every Boolean co-clone, where this is possible. We give evidence that the presented bases are as easy as possible.

The Complexity of Generalized Satisfiability for Linear Temporal Logic

In a seminal paper from 1985, Sistla and Clarke showed that satisfiability for Linear Temporal Logic (LTL) is either NP-complete or PSPACE-complete, depending on the set of temporal operators used. If, in contrast, the set of propositional operators is restricted, the complexity may decrease. This paper undertakes a systematic study of satisfiability for LTL formulae over restricted sets of propositional and temporal operators. Since every propositional operator corresponds to a Boolean function, there exist infinitely many propositional operators. In order to systematically cover all possible sets of them, we use Posts lattice. With its help, we determine the computational complexity of LTL satisfiability for all combinations of temporal operators and all but two classes of propositional functions. Each of these infinitely many problems is shown to be either PSPACE-complete, NP-complete, or in P.

The complexity of satisfiability problems: refining Schaefer's theorem

Schaefer proved in 1978 that the Boolean constraint satisfaction problem for a given constraint language is either in P or is NP-complete, and identified all tractable cases. Schaefers dichotomy theorem actually shows that there are at most two constraint satisfaction problems, up to polynomial-time isomorphism (and these isomorphism types are distinct if and only if P ≠ NP). We show that if one considers AC0 isomorphisms, then there are exactly six isomorphism types (assuming that the complexity classes NP, P, ⊕L, NL, and L are all distinct).

The complexity of satisfiability problems: Refining Schaefer's theorem

Schaefer proved in 1978 that the Boolean constraint satisfaction problem for a given constraint language is either in P or is NP-complete, and identified all tractable cases. Schaefers dichotomy theorem actually shows that there are at most two constraint satisfaction problems, up to polynomial-time isomorphism (and these isomorphism types are distinct if and only if P NP). We show that if one considers AC^0 isomorphisms, then there are exactly six isomorphism types (assuming that the complexity classes NP, P, @?L, NL, and L are all distinct). A similar classification holds for quantified constraint satisfaction problems.

The complexity of generalized satisfiability for linear temporal logic

In a seminal paper from 1985, Sistla and Clarke showed that satisfiability for Linear Temporal Logic (LTL) is either NP-complete or PSPACE-complete, depending on the set of temporal operators used. If, in contrast, the set of propositional operators is restricted, the complexity may decrease. This paper undertakes a systematic study of satisfiability for LTL formulae over restricted sets of propositional and temporal operators. Since every propositional operator corresponds to a Boolean function, there exist infinitely many propositional operators. In order to systematically cover all possible sets of them, we use Posts lattice. With its help, we determine the computational complexity of LTL satisfiability for all combinations of temporal operators and all but two classes of propositional functions. Each of these infinitely many problems is shown to be either PSPACE-complete, NP-complete, or in P.

Partial Polymorphisms and Constraint Satisfaction Problems

The Galois connection between clones and and co-clones has received a lot of attention in the context of complexity considerations for constraint satisfaction problems. However, it fails if we are interested in a reduction giving equivalence instead of only satisfiability-equivalence. We show how a similar Galois connection involving weaker closure operators can be applied for these problems. As an example of the usefulness of our construction, we show how to obtain very short proofs of complexity classifications in this context.

The tractability of model checking for LTL: The good, the bad, and the ugly fragments

In a seminal paper from 1985, Sistla and Clarke showed that the model-checking problem for Linear Temporal Logic (LTL) is either NP-complete or PSPACE-complete, depending on the set of temporal operators used. If in contrast, the set of propositional operators is restricted, the complexity may decrease. This article systematically studies the model-checking problem for LTL formulae over restricted sets of propositional and temporal operators. For almost all combinations of temporal and propositional operators, we determine whether the model-checking problem is tractable (in PTIME) or intractable (NP-hard). We then focus on the tractable cases, showing that they all are NL-complete or even logspace solvable. This leads to a surprising gap in complexity between tractable and intractable cases. It is worth noting that our analysis covers an infinite set of problems, since there are infinitely many sets of propositional operators.

Modal Independence Logic

This paper introduces modal independence logic MIL, a modal logic that can explicitly talk about independence among propositional variables. Formulas of MIL are not evaluated in worlds but in sets of worlds, so called teams. In this vein, MIL can be seen as a variant of Vaananen’s modal dependence logic MDL. We show that MIL embeds MDL and is strictly more expressive. However, on singleton teams, MIL is shown to be not more expressive than usual modal logic, but MIL is exponentially more succinct. Making use of a new form of bisimulation, we extend these expressivity results to modal logics extended by various generalized dependence atoms. We demonstrate the expressive power of MIL by giving a specification of the anonymity requirement of the dining cryptographers protocol in MIL. We also study complexity issues of MIL and show that, though it is more expressive, its satisfiability and model checking problem have the same complexity as for MDL.

Generalized modal satisfiability

It is well-known that modal satisfiability is PSPACE-complete [Lad77]. However, the complexity may decrease if we restrict the set of propositional operators used. Note that there exist an infinite number of propositional operators, since a propositional operator is simply a Boolean function. We completely classify the complexity of modal satisfiability for every finite set of propositional operators, i.e., in contrast to previous work, we classify an infinite number of problems. We show that, depending on the set of propositional operators, modal satisfiability is PSPACE-complete, coNP-complete, or in P. We obtain this trichotomy not only for modal formulas, but also for their more succinct representation using modal circuits.

A Van Benthem Theorem for Modal Team Semantics

The famous van Benthem theorem states that modal logic corresponds exactly to the fragment of first-order logic that is invariant under bisimulation. In this article we prove an exact analogue of this theorem in the framework of modal dependence logic (MDL) and team semantics. We show that Modal Team Logic (MTL) extending MDL by classical negation captures exactly the FO-definable bisimulation invariant properties of Kripke structures and teams. We also compare the expressive power of MTL to most of the variants and extensions of MDL recently studied in the area.