Publication: Beyond ω-regular languages: ωT-regular expressions and their automata and logic counterparts
Full text at PDC
Advisors (or tutors)
In the last years, some extensions of ω-regular languages, namely, ωB-regular (ω-regular languages extended with boundedness), ωS-regular (ω-regular languages extended with strong unboundedness), and ωBS-regular languages (the combination of ωB- and ωS-regular ones), have been proposed in the literature. While the first two classes satisfy a generalized closure property, which states that the complement of an ωB-regular (resp., ωS-regular) language is an ωS-regular (resp., ωB-regular) one, the last class is not closed under complementation. The existence of non-ωBS-regular languages that are the complements of some ωBS-regular ones and express fairly natural asymptotic behaviors motivates the search for other significant classes of extended ω-regular languages. In this paper, we present the class of ωT-regular languages, which includes meaningful languages that are not ωBS-regular. We define this new class of languages in terms of ωT-regular expressions. Then, we introduce a new class of automata (counter-check automata) and we prove that (i) their emptiness problem is decidable in PTIME, and (ii) they are expressive enough to capture ωT-regular languages. We also provide an encoding of ωT-regular expressions into S1S+U. Finally, we investigate a stronger variant of ωT-regular languages (-regular languages). We characterize the resulting class of languages in terms of -regular expressions, and we show how to map it into a suitable class of automata, called counter-queue automata. We conclude the paper with a comparison of the expressiveness of ωT- and -regular languages and of the corresponding automata.
"This is a pre-print of an article published in Theoretical Computer Science. The final authenticated version is available online at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tcs.2019.12.029”.
 D. Della Monica, A. Montanari, P. Sala, Beyond ωBS-regular languages: ωT-regular expressions and counter-check automata, in: P. Bouyer, A. Orlandini, P. San Pietro (Eds.), Proc. of the 8th International Symposium on Games, Automata, Logics and Formal Verification, GandALF, Roma, Italy, in: EPTCS, vol. 256, 2017, pp. 223–237.  D. Barozzini, D. Della Monica, A. Montanari, P. Sala, Counter-queue automata with an application to a meaningful extension of omega-regular languages, in: Joint Proceedings of the 18th Italian Conference on Theoretical Computer Science (ICTCS) and the 32nd Italian Conference on Computational Logic (CILC), in: CEUR Workshop Proceedings, CEUR-WS.org, vol. 1949, 2017, pp. 27–38.  J.R. Büchi, On a decision method in restricted second order arithmetic, in: Proc. of the 1960 Int. Congress on Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science, 1962, pp. 1–11.  R. McNaughton, Testing and generating infinite sequences by a finite automaton, Inf. Control 9(5) (1966) 521–530, https://doi .org /10 .1016 /S0019 -9958(66 )80013 -X.  C.C. Elgot, M.O. Rabin, Decidability and undecidability of extensions of second (first) order theory of (generalized) successor, J. Symb. Log. 31 (2) (1966) 169–181, https://doi .org /10 .1002 /malq .19600060105.  W. Thomas, Automata on infinite objects, in: Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science, Volume B: Formal Models and Sematics (B), MIT Press, 1990, pp. 133–192.  M. Bojanczyk, Weak MSO with the unbounding quantifier, Theory Comput. Syst. 48 (3) (2011) 554–576, https://doi .org /10 .1007 /s00224 -010 -9279 -2.  M. Bojanczyk, T. Colcombet, Bounds in ω-regularity, in: LICS, 2006, pp. 285–296.  M. Bojanczyk, T. Colcombet, Boundedness in languages of infinite words, Log. Methods Comput. Sci. 13 (4:3) (2017) 1–54. M. Bojanczyk, S. Torunczyk, Deterministic automata and extensions of weak MSO, in: R. Kannan, K.N. Kumar (Eds.), Proc. of the 29th Conference on Foundations of Software Technology and Theoretical Computer Science, FSTTCS, in: LIPIcs, vol. 4, Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik, 2009, pp. 73–84.  R. Alur, T.A. Henzinger, Finitary fairness, ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 20 (6) (1998) 1171–1194, https://doi .org /10 .1145 /295656 .295659.  O. Kupferman, N. Piterman, M.Y. Vardi, From liveness to promptness, Form. Methods Syst. Des. 34 (2) (2009) 83–103, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10703-009-0067-z. D. Della Monica, A. Montanari, A. Murano, P. Sala, Prompt interval temporal logic, in: JELIA, in: LNCS, vol. 10021, Springer, 2016, pp. 207–222.M. Bojanczyk, A bounding quantifier, in: CSL, in: LNCS, vol. 3210, Springer, 2004, pp. 41–55. M. Bojanczyk, P. Parys, S. Torunczyk, The MSO+U theory of (N, <) is undecidable, in: STACS, in: LIPIcs, vol. 47, 2016, pp. 21:1–21:8.  D. Della Monica, A. Montanari, P. Sala, Beyond ωBS-regular languages: the class of ωT-regular languages, research Report 2017/01, Dept. of Mathematics, Computer Science, and Physics, University of Udine, Italy, 2017, https://users.dimi.uniud.it /~angelo .montanari /res _rep2017 _1.pdf. L. Breveglieri, A. Cherubini, C. Citrini, S. Crespi-Reghizzi, Multi-push-down languages and grammars, Int. J. Found. Comput. Sci. 7(03) (1996) 253–291. M.F. Atig, B. Bollig, P. Habermehl, Emptiness of multi-pushdown automata is 2ETIME-complete, in: Developments in Language Theory, Springer, 2008, pp. 121–133.  S. Hummel, M. Skrzypczak, The topological complexity of MSO+U and related automata models, Fundam. Inform. 119 (1) (2012) 87–111, https://doi.org/10.3233/FI-2012-728. M. Skrzypczak, Separation property for ωB-and ωS-regular languages, Log. Methods Comput. Sci. 10 (1) (2014), https://doi .org /10 .2168 /LMCS -10(1 :8 )2014.A. Montanari, P. Sala, Adding an equivalence relation to the interval logic ABB: complexity and expressiveness, in: LICS, IEEE Computer Society, 2013, pp. 193–202. A. Montanari, P. Sala, Interval logics and ωB-regular languages, in: LATA, in: LNCS, vol. 7810, Springer, 2013, pp. 431–443.