Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Search
2000 character limit reached

Finite Representability of Semigroups with Demonic Refinement

Published 15 Sep 2020 in cs.LO and math.LO | (2009.06970v1)

Abstract: Composition and demonic refinement ⊑\sqsubseteq of binary relations are defined by \begin{align*} (x, y)\in (R;S)&\iff \exists z((x, z)\in R\wedge (z, y)\in S) R\sqsubseteq S&\iff (dom(S)\subseteq dom(R) \wedge R\restriction_{dom(S)}\subseteq S) \end{align*} where dom(S)=x:∃y(x,y)∈Sdom(S)={x:\exists y (x, y)\in S} and R↾dom(S)R\restriction_{dom(S)} denotes the restriction of RR to pairs (x,y)(x, y) where x∈dom(S)x\in dom(S). Demonic calculus was introduced to model the total correctness of non-deterministic programs and has been applied to program verification. We prove that the class R(⊑,;)R(\sqsubseteq, ;) of abstract (≤,∘)(\leq, \circ) structures isomorphic to a set of binary relations ordered by demonic refinement with composition cannot be axiomatised by any finite set of first-order (≤,∘)(\leq, \circ) formulas. We provide a fairly simple, infinite, recursive axiomatisation that defines R(⊑,;)R(\sqsubseteq, ;). We prove that a finite representable (≤,∘)(\leq, \circ) structure has a representation over a finite base. This appears to be the first example of a signature for binary relations with composition where the representation class is non-finitely axiomatisable, but where the finite representations for finite representable structures property holds.

Authors (2)
Citations (7)

Summary

No one has generated a summary of this paper yet.

Paper to Video (Beta)

No one has generated a video about this paper yet.

Whiteboard

No one has generated a whiteboard explanation for this paper yet.

Open Problems

We haven't generated a list of open problems mentioned in this paper yet.

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.