Beyond ωBS-regular Languages: ωT-regular Expressions and Counter-Check Automata

In the last years, various extensions of {\omega}-regular languages have been proposed in the literature, including {\omega}B-regular ({\omega}-regular languages extended with boundedness), {\omega}S-regular ({\omega}-regular languages extended with strict unboundedness), and {\omega}BS-regular languages (the combination of {\omega}B- and {\omega}S-regular ones). While the first two classes satisfy a generalized closure property, namely, the complement of an {\omega}B-regular (resp., {\omega}S-regular) language is an {\omega}S-regular (resp., {\omega}B-regular) one, the last class is not closed under complementation. The existence of non-{\omega}BS-regular languages that are the complements of some {\omega}BS-regular ones and express fairly natural properties of reactive systems motivates the search for other well-behaved classes of extended {\omega}-regular languages. In this paper, we introduce the class of {\omega}T-regular languages, that includes meaningful languages which are not {\omega}BS-regular. We first define it in terms of {\omega}T-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 {\omega}T-regular languages (whether or not {\omega}T-regular languages are expressively complete with respect to counter-check automata is still an open problem). Finally, we provide an encoding of {\omega}T-regular expressions into S1S+U.

[1]  Thomas Colcombet,et al.  Bounds in ω-regularity , .

[2]  Mikolaj Bojanczyk,et al.  Weak MSO with the Unbounding Quantifier , 2009, Theory of Computing Systems.

[3]  J. R. Büchi On a Decision Method in Restricted Second Order Arithmetic , 1990 .

[4]  J. Büchi Weak Second‐Order Arithmetic and Finite Automata , 1960 .

[5]  Angelo Montanari,et al.  Interval Logics and ωB-Regular Languages , 2013, LATA.

[6]  Calvin C. Elgot,et al.  Decidability and Undecidability of Extensions of Second (First) Order Theory of (Generalized) Successor , 1966, J. Symb. Log..

[7]  Szczepan Hummel,et al.  The Topological Complexity of MSO+U and Related Automata Models , 2012, Fundam. Informaticae.

[8]  Thomas A. Henzinger,et al.  Finitary fairness , 1998, TOPL.

[9]  Szymon Torunczyk,et al.  The MSO+U theory of (N, <) is undecidable , 2016, STACS.

[10]  Robert McNaughton,et al.  Testing and Generating Infinite Sequences by a Finite Automaton , 1966, Inf. Control..

[11]  P ? ? ? ? ? ? ? % ? ? ? ? , 1991 .

[12]  Angelo Montanari,et al.  Adding an Equivalence Relation to the Interval Logic ABB: Complexity and Expressiveness , 2013, 2013 28th Annual ACM/IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science.

[13]  Dario Della Monica,et al.  Prompt Interval Temporal Logic , 2016, JELIA.

[14]  Orna Kupferman,et al.  From liveness to promptness , 2009, Formal Methods Syst. Des..

[15]  Mikolaj Bojanczyk A Bounding Quantifier , 2004, CSL.

[16]  MICHA L SKRZYPCZAK,et al.  SEPARATION PROPERTY FOR ωB- AND ωS-REGULAR LANGUAGES , 2014 .

[17]  Thomas Colcombet,et al.  Bounds in w-Regularity , 2006, 21st Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science (LICS'06).

[18]  Michal Skrzypczak Separation Property for wB- and wS-regular Languages , 2014, Log. Methods Comput. Sci..