Skip to main content

The Freedoms of (Guarded) Bisimulation

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Johan van Benthem on Logic and Information Dynamics

Part of the book series: Outstanding Contributions to Logic ((OCTR,volume 5))

Abstract

We survey different notions of bisimulation equivalence that provide flexible and powerful concepts for understanding the expressive power as well as the model-theoretic and algorithmic properties of modal logics and of more and more powerful variants of guarded logics. An appropriate notion of bisimulation for a logic allows us to study the expressive power of that logic in terms of semantic invariance and logical indistinguishability. As bisimilar nodes or tuples in two structures cannot be distinguished by formulae of the logic, bisimulations may be used to control the complexity of the models under consideration. In this manner, bisimulation-respecting model constructions and transformations lead to results about model-theoretic properties of modal and guarded logics, such as the tree model property of modal logics and the fact that satisfiable guarded formulae have models of bounded tree width. A highlight of the bisimulation-based analysis are the characterisation theorems: inside a classical level of logical expressiveness such as first-order or monadic second-order definability, these provide a tight match between bisimulation invariance and logical definability. Typically such characterisation theorems state that a modal or guarded logic is not only invariant under bisimulation but, conversely, also expressively complete for the class of all bisimulation invariant properties at that level. Finally, the bisimulation-based analysis of modal and guarded logics also leads to important insights concerning their algorithmic properties. Since satisfiable formulae always admit simple models, for instance tree-like ones, and since modal and guarded logics can be embedded or interpreted in monadic second-order logic on trees, powerful automata theoretic methods become available for checking satisfiability and for evaluating formulae.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    If \(\mathbf{x}\mathbf{y}\) consists of a single variable symbol \(z\), \(\alpha \) can be the equality \(z=z\).

  2. 2.

    One should except the initial position from the guardedness requirement in order to match the liberal treatment of (outermost) free variables in \(\mathrm {GF}\).

  3. 3.

    We attach the empty set as a root to \(I({\mathfrak {A}})\) and join it to every guarded set to obtain a natural tree unfolding for our purposes, rather than a forest.

  4. 4.

    It may be worth to point out that, unlike the finite bisimilar coverings obtained for graph-like structures in [18], the bisimilar coverings of relational structures or of hypergraphs will necessarily be branched coverings, and do not provide unique liftings.

  5. 5.

    Caveat: \(\pi (h({\mathfrak {C}})) \subseteq {\mathfrak {A}}\) need not itself be acyclic.

  6. 6.

    It should be noted that this stand-alone argument does not support the complexity bounds that flow from the more constructive proof of Corollary 1.27 in [2].

References

  1. Andréka H, van Benthem J, Németi I (1998) Modal languages and bounded fragments of predicate logic. J Philoso Logic 27:217–274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. BĂ¡rĂ¡ny V, Gottlob G, Otto M (2014) Querying the guarded fragment. Logical Methods Comput Sci (to appear)

    Google Scholar 

  3. BĂ¡rĂ¡ny V, ten Cate B, Segoufin L (2011) Guarded negation. In: Proceedings of ICALP, pp 356–367

    Google Scholar 

  4. Beeri C, Fagin R, Maier D, Yannakakis M (1983) On the desirability of acyclic database schemes. J ACM 30:497–513

    Google Scholar 

  5. van Benthem J (1983) Modal logic and classical logic. Bibliopolis, Napoli

    Google Scholar 

  6. van Benthem J (2005) Guards, bounds, and generalized semantics. J Logic Lang Inform 14(3):263–279

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. van Benthem J (2007) A new modal Lindström theorem. Log Univers 1:125–138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. van Benthem J, ten Cate B, Väänänen J (2007) Lindström theorems for fragments of first-order logic. In: Proceedings of 22nd IEEE symposium on logic in computer science, LICS 2007, pp 280–292

    Google Scholar 

  9. Berge C (1973) Graphs and hypergraphs. North-Holland, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  10. ten Cate B, Segoufin L (2011) Unary negation. In: Proceedings of STACS, pp 344–355

    Google Scholar 

  11. Dawar A, Otto M (2009) Modal characterisation theorems over special classes of frames. Ann Pure Appl Logic 161:1–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Grädel E (1999) On the restraining power of guards. J Symbolic Logic 64:1719–1742

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Grädel E (2002) Guarded fixed point logics and the monadic theory of countable trees. Theoret Comput Sci 288:129–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Grädel E, Hirsch C, Otto M (2002) Back and forth between guarded and modal logics. ACM Trans Comput Logics 3:418–463

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Grädel E, Walukiewicz I (1999) Guarded fixed point logic. In: Proceedings of 14th IEEE symposium on logic in computer science, LICS 1999, pp 45–54

    Google Scholar 

  16. Herwig B (1995) Extending partial isomorphisms on finite structures. Combinatorica 15:365–371

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Herwig B, Lascar D (2000) Extending partial isomorphisms and the profinite topology on free groups. Trans AMS 352:1985–2021

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Otto M (2004) Modal and guarded characterisation theorems over finite transition systems. Ann Pure Appl Logic 164(12):1418–1453

    Google Scholar 

  19. Otto M (2006) Bisimulation invariance and finite models. In: Colloquium logicum 2002. Lecture notes in logic, pp 276–298, ASL

    Google Scholar 

  20. Otto M (2011) Model theoretic methods for fragments of FO and special classes of (finite) structures. In: Esparza J, Michaux C, Steinhorn C (eds) Finite and algorithmic model theory, volume 379 of LMS lecture notes, pp 271–341. CUP

    Google Scholar 

  21. Otto M (2012a) Highly acyclic groups, hypergraph covers and the guarded fragment. J ACM 59:1

    Google Scholar 

  22. Otto M (2012b) On groupoids and hypergraphs. arXiv:1211.5656 (preprint)

  23. Otto M (2013a) Expressive completeness through logically tractable models. Ann Pure Appl Logic 164(12):1418–1453

    Google Scholar 

  24. Otto M (2013b) Groupoids, hypergraphs and symmetries in finite models. In: Proceedings of 28th IEEE symposium on logic in computer science, LICS 2013

    Google Scholar 

  25. Otto M (2014) Finite groupoids, finite coverings and symmetries in finite structures. arXiv:1404.4599 (preprint)

  26. Otto M, Piro R (2008) A Lindström characterisation of the guarded fragment and of modal logic with a global modality. In: Areces C, Goldblatt R (eds) Advances in modal logic 7, pp 273–288

    Google Scholar 

  27. Rabin M (1969) Decidability of second-order theories and automata on infinite trees. Trans AMS 141:1–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Rosen E (1997) Modal logic over finite structures. J Logic Lang Inform 6:427–439

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Rossman B (2008) Homomorphism preservation theorems. J ACM 55:1–53

    Google Scholar 

  30. Vardi M (1998) Reasoning about the past with two-way automata. In: Automata, languages and programming ICALP 98. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 1443. Springer, pp 628–641

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Erich Grädel .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Grädel, E., Otto, M. (2014). The Freedoms of (Guarded) Bisimulation. In: Baltag, A., Smets, S. (eds) Johan van Benthem on Logic and Information Dynamics. Outstanding Contributions to Logic, vol 5. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-06025-5_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics