Advertisement

Fragments of Spider Diagrams of Order and Their Relative Expressiveness

Conference paper
  • 1.1k Downloads
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6170)

Abstract

Investigating the expressiveness of a diagrammatic logic provides insight into how its syntactic elements interact at the semantic level. Moreover, it allows for comparisons with other notations. Various expressiveness results for diagrammatic logics are known, such as the theorem that Shin’s Venn-II system is equivalent to monadic first order logic. The techniques employed by Shin for Venn-II were adapted to allow the expressiveness of Euler diagrams to be investigated. We consider the expressiveness of spider diagrams of order (SDoO), which extend spider diagrams by including syntax that provides ordering information between elements. Fragments of SDoO are created by systematically removing each aspect of the syntax. We establish the relative expressiveness of the various fragments. In particular, one result establishes that spiders are syntactic sugar in any fragment that contains order, negation and shading. We also show that shading is syntactic sugar in any fragment containing negation and spiders. The existence of syntactic redundancy within the spider diagram of order logic is unsurprising however, we find it interesting that spiders or shading are redundant in fragments of the logic. Further expressiveness results are presented throughout the paper. The techniques we employ may well extend to related notations, such as the Euler/Venn logic of Swoboda et al. and Kent’s constraint diagrams.

Keywords

Order Logic Regular Language Spider Diagram Relative Expressiveness Diagrammatic Logic 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Kent, S.: Constraint diagrams: Visualizing invariants in object oriented modelling. In: Proceedings of OOPSLA 1997, pp. 327–341. ACM Press, New York (1997)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dau, F.: The Logic System of Concept Graphs with Negations: And its Relationship to Prediacte Logic. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hammer, E.: Logic and Visual Information. CSLI Publications, Stanford (1995)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Swoboda, N., Allwein, G.: Using DAG transformations to verify Euler/Venn homogeneous and Euler/Venn FOL heterogeneous rules of inference. Journal on Software and System Modeling 3, 136–149 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Howse, J., Stapleton, G., Taylor, J.: Spider diagrams. LMS Journal of Computation and Mathematics 8, 145–194 (2005)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Shin, S.J.: The Logical Status of Diagrams. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1994)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Stapleton, G., Howse, J., Taylor, J.: A decidable constraint diagram reasoning system. Journal of Logic and Computation 15(6), 975–1008 (2005)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Delaney, A., Stapleton, G.: Spider diagrams of order. In: International Workshop on Visual Languages and Logic (September 2007)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Stapleton, G., Masthoff, J.: Incorporating negation into visual logics: A case study using Euler diagrams. In: Visual Languages and Computing 2007, pp. 187–194. Knowledge Systems Institute (2007)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Stapleton, G., Thompson, S., Howse, J., Taylor, J.: The expressiveness of spider diagrams. Journal of Logic and Computation 14(6), 857–880 (2004)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Delaney, A., Taylor, J., Thompson, S.: Spider diagrams of order and a hierarchy of star-free regular languages. In: Stapleton, G., Howse, J., Lee, J. (eds.) Diagrams 2008. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 5223, pp. 172–187. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Thomas, W.: Classifying regular events in symbolic logic. Journal of Computer and System Sciences 25, 360–376 (1982)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ebbinghaus, H.D., Flum, J.: Finite Model Theory, 2nd edn. Springer, Heidelberg (1991)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Manzano, M.: Model Theory. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1999)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Delaney, A., Stapleton, G., Taylor, J., Thompson, S.: A diagrammatic characterisation of commutative star-free regular languages (in preparation)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Visual Modelling GroupUniversity of BrightonUK
  2. 2.Computing LaboratoryUniversity of KentUK

Personalised recommendations