Rational verification refers to the problem of checking which temporal logic properties hold of a concurrent multiagent system, under the assumption that agents in the system choose strategies that form a game-theoretic equilibrium. Rational verification can be understood as a counterpart to model checking for multiagent systems, but while classical model checking can be done in polynomial time for some temporal logic specification languages such as CTL, and polynomial space with LTL specifications, rational verification is much harder: the key decision problems for rational verification are 2EXPTIME-complete with LTL specifications, even when using explicit-state system representations. Against this background, our contributions in this paper are threefold. First, we show that the complexity of rational verification can be greatly reduced by restricting specifications to GR(1), a fragment of LTL that can represent a broad and practically useful class of response properties of reactive systems. In particular, we show that for a number of relevant settings, rational verification can be done in polynomial space and even in polynomial time. Second, we provide improved complexity results for rational verification when considering players' goals given by mean-payoff utility functions; arguably the most widely used approach for quantitative objectives in concurrent and multiagent systems. Finally, we consider the problem of computing outcomes that satisfy social welfare constraints. To this end, we consider both utilitarian and egalitarian social welfare and show that computing such outcomes is either PSPACE-complete or NP-complete.

Plotkin, M. Binary codes with specified minimum distance.

Techniques for automatically generating abstractions of systems have been the linchpins of formal methods, playing crucial roles in extending the reach of formal methods to large hardware and software systems. To address the challenges of very high-dimensional hybrid-state spaces and input spaces for ML-based systems, we need to develop effective techniques to abstract ML models into simpler models that are more amenable to formal analysis. Some promising directions include using abstract interpretation to analyze DNNs (for example, Gehr et al.12), developing abstractions for falsifying cyber-physical systems with ML components,5 and devising novel representations for verification (for instance, star sets and other examples36).

We consider the problem of reaching a propositional goal condition in fully-observable nondeterministic (FOND) planning under a general class of fairness assumptions that are given explicitly. The fairness assumptions are of the form A/B and say that state trajectories that contain infinite occurrences of an action a from A in a state s and finite occurrence of actions from B, must also contain infinite occurrences of action a in s followed by each one of its possible outcomes. The infinite trajectories that violate this condition are deemed as unfair, and the solutions are policies for which all the fair trajectories reach a goal state. We show that strong and strong-cyclic FOND planning, as well as QNP planning, a planning model introduced recently for generalized planning, are all special cases of FOND planning with fairness assumptions of this form which can also be combined. FOND+ planning, as this form of planning is called, combines the syntax of FOND planning with some of the versatility of LTL for expressing fairness constraints. A sound and complete FOND+ planner is implemented by reducing FOND+ planning to answer set programs, and its performance is evaluated in comparison with FOND and QNP planners, and LTL synthesis tools. Two other FOND+ planners are introduced as well which are more scalable but are not complete.  

Inductive logic programming (ILP) is a form of machine learning. The goal of ILP is to induce a hypothesis (a set of logical rules) that generalises training examples. As ILP turns 30, we provide a new introduction to the field. We introduce the necessary logical notation and the main learning settings; describe the building blocks of an ILP system; compare several systems on several dimensions; describe four systems (Aleph, TILDE, ASPAL, and Metagol); highlight key application areas; and, finally, summarise current limitations and directions for future research.

We study finite first-order satisfiability (FSAT) in the constructive setting of dependent type theory. Employing synthetic accounts of enumerability and decidability, we give a full classification of FSAT depending on the first-order signature of non-logical symbols. On the one hand, our development focuses on Trakhtenbrot's theorem, stating that FSAT is undecidable as soon as the signature contains an at least binary relation symbol. Our proof proceeds by a many-one reduction chain starting from the Post correspondence problem. On the other hand, we establish the decidability of FSAT for monadic first-order logic, i.e. where the signature only contains at most unary function and relation symbols, as well as the enumerability of FSAT for arbitrary enumerable signatures. To showcase an application of Trakhtenbrot's theorem, we continue our reduction chain with a many-one reduction from FSAT to separation logic. All our results are mechanised in the framework of a growing Coq library of synthetic undecidability proofs.

We study orbit-finite systems of linear equations, in the setting of sets with atoms. Our principal contribution is a decision procedure for solvability of such systems. The procedure works for every field (and even commutative ring) under mild effectiveness assumptions, and reduces a given orbit-finite system to a number of finite ones: exponentially many in general, but polynomially many when atom dimension of input systems is fixed. Towards obtaining the procedure we push further the theory of vector spaces generated by orbit-finite sets, and show that each such vector space admits an orbit-finite basis. This fundamental property is a key tool in our development, but should be also of wider interest.

Quantitative extensions of logic programming often require the solution of so called second level inference tasks, i.e., problems that involve a third operation, such as maximization or normalization, on top of addition and multiplication, and thus go beyond the well-known weighted or algebraic model counting setting of probabilistic logic programming under the distribution semantics. We introduce Second Level Algebraic Model Counting (2AMC) as a generic framework for these kinds of problems. As 2AMC is to (algebraic) model counting what forall-exists-SAT is to propositional satisfiability, it is notoriously hard to solve. First level techniques based on Knowledge Compilation (KC) have been adapted for specific 2AMC instances by imposing variable order constraints on the resulting circuit. However, those constraints can severely increase the circuit size and thus decrease the efficiency of such approaches. We show that we can exploit the logical structure of a 2AMC problem to omit parts of these constraints, thus limiting the negative effect. Furthermore, we introduce and implement a strategy to generate a sufficient set of constraints statically, with a priori guarantees for the performance of KC. Our empirical evaluation on several benchmarks and tasks confirms that our theoretical results can translate into more efficient solving in practice. Under consideration for acceptance in TPLP.

Abstract: A logic has uniform interpolation if its formulas can be projected down to given subsignatures, preserving all logical consequences that do not mention the removed symbols; the weaker property of (Craig) interpolation allows the projected formula -- the interpolant -- to be different for each logical consequence of the original formula. These properties are of importance, e.g., in the modularization of logical theories. We study interpolation in the context of coalgebraic modal logics, i.e. modal logics axiomatized in rank 1, restricting for clarity to the case with finitely many modalities. Examples of such logics include the modal logics K and KD, neighbourhood logic and its monotone variant, finite-monoid-weighted logics, and coalition logic. We introduce a notion of one-step (uniform) interpolation, which refers only to a restricted logic without nesting of modalities, and show that a coalgebraic modal logic has uniform interpolation if it has one- step interpolation.

In recent years, there has been an increasing interest in exploiting logically specified background knowledge in order to obtain neural models (i) with a better performance, (ii) able to learn from less data, and/or (iii) guaranteed to be compliant with the background knowledge itself, e.g., for safety-critical applications. In this survey, we retrace such works and categorize them based on (i) the logical language that they use to express the background knowledge and (ii) the goals that they achieve.