Why so Many Temporal Logics Climb up the Trees?
Many temporal logics were suggested as branching time specification formalisms during the last 20 years. These logics were compared against each other for their expressive power, model checking complexity and succinctness. Yet, unlike the case for linear time logics, no canonical temporal logic of branching time was agreed upon. We offer an explanation for the multiplicity of temporal logics over branching time and provide an objective quantified ‘yardstick’ to measure these logics.
We define an infinite hierarchy BTL k of temporal logics and prove its strictness. We show that CTL* has no finite base, and that almost all of its many sub-logics suggested in the literature are inside the second level of our hierarchy. We show that for every logic based on a finite set of modalities, the complexity of model checking is linear both in the size of structure and the size of formula.
KeywordsModel Check Temporal Logic Expressive Power Truth Table Computation Tree
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.E.M. Clarke and E.A. Emerson (1981). Design and verification of synchronous skeletons using branching time temporal logic. LNCS 131:52–71.Google Scholar
- 2.E.M. Clarke, E.A. Emerson and A.P. Sistla. Automatic verification of finite state concurrent system using temporal logic. In: POPL, 1983.Google Scholar
- 4.E.A. Emerson (1990). Temporal and modal logic. In J. van Leeuwen, editor, Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science, volume B. Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1990.Google Scholar
- 5.E.A. Emerson (1996). Automated Temporal Reasoning about Reactive Systems. LNCS vol. 1043, pp. 41–101, Springer Verlag 1996.Google Scholar
- 6.E.A. Emerson and J.Y. Halpern (1982). Decision procedures and expressiveness in the temporal logic of branching time. In STOC’82. pp. 169–180.Google Scholar
- 8.E.A. Emerson and C.L. Lei. Modalities for model checking: branching time strikes back. 12th ACM Symp. on POPL, pp. 84–96, 1985.Google Scholar
- 9.D. Gabbay, I. Hodkinson and M. Reynolds (1994). Temporal Logic. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- 10.T. Hafer and W. Thomas (1987). Computation tree logic CTL* and path quantifiers in the monadic theory of the binary tree. In ICALP’87, LNCS 267:269–279. Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
- 11.Y. Hirshfeld and A. Rabinovich (1999). Quantitative Temporal Logic. LNCS 1683:172–187, Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
- 12.D. Janin and I. Walukiewicz (1996). On the expressive completeness of the propositional mu-calculus with respect to monadic second order logic. In CONCUR’96, LNCS 1119:263–277, Springer-Verlag. 639Google Scholar
- 13.H.W. Kamp (1968). Tense logic and the theory of linear order. PhD Thesis, University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
- 14.L. Lamport (1980). “Sometimes” is sometimes ”not never”-On the temporal logic of programs. In POPL’80. pp. 174–185.Google Scholar
- 15.S. Maoz (2000). Infinite Hierarchy of Temporal Logics over Branching Time Models. M.Sc. Thesis, Tel-Aviv University.Google Scholar
- 16.R. Milner (1989). Communication and Concurrency. Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
- 17.F. Moller and A. Rabinovich (1999). On the expressive power of CTL*. Proceedings of fourteenth IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, 360–369.Google Scholar