Bisimulations have been widely used in many areas of computer science to model equivalence between various systems, and to reduce the number of states of these systems, whereas uniform fuzzy relations have recently been introduced as a means to model the fuzzy equivalence between elements of two possible different sets. Here we use the conjunction of these two concepts as a powerful tool in the study of equivalence between fuzzy automata. We prove that a uniform fuzzy relation between fuzzy automata $\cal A$ and $\cal B$ is a forward bisimulation if and only if its kernel and co-kernel are forward bisimulation fuzzy equivalences on $\cal A$ and $\cal B$ and there is a special isomorphism between factor fuzzy automata with respect to these fuzzy equivalences. As a consequence we get that fuzzy automata $\cal A$ and $\cal B$ are UFB-equivalent, i.e., there is a uniform forward bisimulation between them, if and only if there is a special isomorphism between the factor fuzzy automata of $\cal A$ and $\cal B$ with respect to their greatest forward bisimulation fuzzy equivalences. This result reduces the problem of testing UFB-equivalence to the problem of testing isomorphism of fuzzy automata, which is closely related to the well-known graph isomorphism problem. We prove some similar results for backward-forward bisimulations, and we point to fundamental differences. Because of the duality with the studied concepts, backward and forward-backward bisimulations are not considered separately. Finally, we give a comprehensive overview of various concepts on deterministic, nondeterministic, fuzzy, and weighted automata, which are related to bisimulations.

A fundamental task for propositional logic is to compute models of propositional formulas. Programs developed for this task are called satisfiability solvers. We show that transition systems introduced by Nieuwenhuis, Oliveras, and Tinelli to model and analyze satisfiability solvers can be adapted for solvers developed for two other propositional formalisms: logic programming under the answer-set semantics, and the logic PC(ID). We show that in each case the task of computing models can be seen as "satisfiability modulo answer-set programming," where the goal is to find a model of a theory that also is an answer set of a certain program. The unifying perspective we develop shows, in particular, that solvers CLASP and MINISATID are closely related despite being developed for different formalisms, one for answer-set programming and the latter for the logic PC(ID).

Computability logic (CoL) (see http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~giorgi/cl.html) is a recently introduced semantical platform and ambitious program for redeveloping logic as a formal theory of computability, as opposed to the formal theory of truth that logic has more traditionally been. Its expressions represent interactive computational tasks seen as games played by a machine against the environment, and "truth" is understood as existence of an algorithmic winning strategy. With logical operators standing for operations on games, the formalism of CoL is open-ended, and has already undergone series of extensions. This article extends the expressive power of CoL in a qualitatively new way, generalizing formulas (to which the earlier languages of CoL were limited) to circuit-style structures termed cirquents. The latter, unlike formulas, are able to account for subgame/subtask sharing between different parts of the overall game/task. Among the many advantages offered by this ability is that it allows us to capture, refine and generalize the well known independence-friendly logic which, after the present leap forward, naturally becomes a conservative fragment of CoL, just as classical logic had been known to be a conservative fragment of the formula-based version of CoL. Technically, this paper is self-contained, and can be read without any prior familiarity with CoL.

This paper relates the well-known formalism of Linear Temporal Logic [Pnu77] with the logic of propositional schemata introduced in [ACP09]. We prove that LTL is equivalent to a particular class of schemata in the sense that polynomial-time translation algorithms exist from one logic to the other. Some consequences about complexity are given. We report about first experiments and the consequences about possible improvements in existing implementations are analyzed.

We solve constraint satisfaction problems through translation to answer set programming (ASP). Our reformulations have the property that unit-propagation in the ASP solver achieves well defined local consistency properties like arc, bound and range consistency. Experiments demonstrate the computational value of this approach.

We study uniform interpolation and forgetting in the description logic ALC. Our main results are model-theoretic characterizations of uniform inter- polants and their existence in terms of bisimula- tions, tight complexity bounds for deciding the existence of uniform interpolants, an approach to computing interpolants when they exist, and tight bounds on their size. We use a mix of model- theoretic and automata-theoretic methods that, as a by-product, also provides characterizations of and decision procedures for conservative extensions.

The problem of finding small unsatisfiable cores for SAT formulas has recently received a lot of interest, mostly for its applications in formal verification. However, propositional logic is often not expressive enough for representing many interesting verification problems, which can be more naturally addressed in the framework of Satisfiability Modulo Theories, SMT. Surprisingly, the problem of finding unsatisfiable cores in SMT has received very little attention in the literature. In this paper we present a novel approach to this problem, called the Lemma-Lifting approach. The main idea is to combine an SMT solver with an external propositional core extractor. The SMT solver produces the theory lemmas found during the search, dynamically lifting the suitable amount of theory information to the Boolean level. The core extractor is then called on the Boolean abstraction of the original SMT problem and of the theory lemmas. This results in an unsatisfiable core for the original SMT problem, once the remaining theory lemmas are removed. The approach is conceptually interesting, and has several advantages in practice. In fact, it is extremely simple to implement and to update, and it can be interfaced with every propositional core extractor in a plug-and-play manner, so as to benefit for free of all unsat-core reduction techniques which have been or will be made available. We have evaluated our algorithm with a very extensive empirical test on SMT-LIB benchmarks, which confirms the validity and potential of this approach.

Knowledge compilation is an approach to tackle the computational intractability of general reasoning problems. According to this approach, knowledge bases are converted off-line into a target compilation language which is tractable for on-line querying. Reduced ordered binary decision diagram (ROBDD) is one of the most influential target languages. We generalize ROBDD by associating some implied literals in each node and the new language is called reduced ordered binary decision diagram with implied literals (ROBDD-L). Then we discuss a kind of subsets of ROBDD-L called ROBDD-i with precisely i implied literals (0 \leq i \leq \infty). In particular, ROBDD-0 is isomorphic to ROBDD; ROBDD-\infty requires that each node should be associated by the implied literals as many as possible. We show that ROBDD-i has uniqueness over some specific variables order, and ROBDD-\infty is the most succinct subset in ROBDD-L and can meet most of the querying requirements involved in the knowledge compilation map. Finally, we propose an ROBDD-i compilation algorithm for any i and a ROBDD-\infty compilation algorithm. Based on them, we implement a ROBDD-L package called BDDjLu and then get some conclusions from preliminary experimental results: ROBDD-\infty is obviously smaller than ROBDD for all benchmarks; ROBDD-\infty is smaller than the d-DNNF the benchmarks whose compilation results are relatively small; it seems that it is better to transform ROBDDs-\infty into FBDDs and ROBDDs rather than straight compile the benchmarks.

Nonmonotonic causal logic, introduced by Norman McCain and Hudson Turner, became a basis for the semantics of several expressive action languages. McCain's embedding of definite propositional causal theories into logic programming paved the way to the use of answer set solvers for answering queries about actions described in such languages. In this paper we extend this embedding to nondefinite theories and to first-order causal logic.

We define a logic of propositional formula schemata adding to the syntax of propositional logic indexed propositions and iterated connectives ranging over intervals parameterized by arithmetic variables. The satisfiability problem is shown to be undecidable for this new logic, but we introduce a very general class of schemata, called bound-linear, for which this problem becomes decidable. This result is obtained by reduction to a particular class of schemata called regular, for which we provide a sound and complete terminating proof procedure. This schemata calculus allows one to capture proof patterns corresponding to a large class of problems specified in propositional logic. We also show that the satisfiability problem becomes again undecidable for slight extensions of this class, thus demonstrating that bound-linear schemata represent a good compromise between expressivity and decidability.