MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3041597941 · doi:10.24963/ijcai.2020/690

Pure-Past Linear Temporal and Dynamic Logic on Finite Traces

2020· article· en· W3041597941 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFormal Methods in Verification
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersEuropean Commission
KeywordsTRACE (psycholinguistics)Exponential functionComputer scienceExploitExpressive powerLinear temporal logicTemporal logicTheoretical computer scienceAlgorithmMarkov decision processDiscrete mathematicsAlgebra over a fieldMathematicsMarkov processPure mathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We review PLTLf and PLDLf, the pure-past versions of the well-known logics on finite traces LTLf and LDLf, respectively. PLTLf and PLDLf are logics about the past, and so scan the trace backwards from the end towards the beginning. Because of this, we can exploit a foundational result on reverse languages to get an exponential improvement, over LTLf /LDLf , for computing the corresponding DFA. This exponential improvement is reflected in several forms of sequential decision making involving temporal specifications, such as planning and decision problems in non-deterministic and non-Markovian domains. Interestingly, PLTLf (resp., PLDLf ) has the same expressive power as LTLf (resp., LDLf ), but transforming a PLTLf (resp., PLDLf ) formula into its equivalent LTLf (resp.,LDLf) is quite expensive. Hence, to take advantage of the exponential improvement, properties of interest must be directly expressed in PLTLf /PLDLf .

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score0.262

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.255 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Quick stats

Citations43
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFormal Methods in VerificationFrench-language works237,207