3 Fusion Logic

3.1 Syntax
3.2 Semantics

3.1 Syntax

Syntax of Fusion Logic [Slide 5]

State formulae:

W ::=
true | p | W1 ∨ W2 |¬W

Future Transition formulae:

FT ::=
W | W | FT1 ∨ FT2 |¬FT

Past Transition formulae:

PT ::=
W | W | PT1 ∨ PT2 |¬PT

Future Fusion expressions:

FE ::=
test(W) |step(FT) | FE1 ∨ FE2 | FE1 ; FE2 | FE∗

Past Fusion expressions:

PE ::=
test(W) |pstep(PT) | PE1 ∨ PE2 | PE1 PE2 | PE

Fusion logic formulae:

FL ::=
true | p |¬FL | FL1 ∨ FL2 | FL | FL |
⟨FE⟩FL | FL⟨PE⟩| FL1 U FL2 | FL1 S FL2

3.2 Semantics

State [Slide 6]

A state is a mapping State from the set of propositional variables Varb to the set of Boolean values Bool ≜{tt,ff}.

tt is the semantic ‘true’ value and ff the semantic ‘false’ value.

State : Varb → Bool

We will use σ0,σ1,σ2,… to denote states and Σ to denote the set of all possible states.

Example 1. Let σ0 be a state such that

σ0(P) = tt
σ0(Q) = ff

Interval and Length [Slide 7]

An interval σ is a finite sequence of states, in [5] also infinite intervals are considered. The decision procedure can also handle infinite intervals.

σ : σ0σ1σ2…

Let Σ+ denote the set of all possible finite intervals with at least one state.

The length of an interval σ is denoted by |σ| and is the number of states minus 1.

Example 2.

σ = σ0
|σ| = 0
σ = σ0σ1
|σ| = 1
σ = σ0σ1…σn
|σ| = n

Prefix, Suffix and Sub Interval [Slide 8]

Let σ = σ0σ1σ2… be an interval then

Example 3. Let σ = σ0σ1σ2σ3 be an interval then

σ0σ1
is a prefix interval of σ
σ1σ2σ3
is a suffix interval of σ
σ1σ2
is a sub interval of σ

Semantics of State Formula [Slide 9]

Let P⟦⟧() be the “meaning” function from ‘state formulae’ × Σ to {tt,ff} and let σ be a finite interval of one state then

P⟦true⟧(σ)
=
tt
P⟦p⟧(σ)
=
σ0(p)
P⟦¬W⟧(σ)
=
not P⟦W⟧(σ)
P⟦W1 ∨ W2⟧(σ)
=
P⟦W1⟧(σ) or P⟦W2⟧(σ)

Semantics of Transition formulae [Slide 10]

Let Tf⟦⟧() and Tp⟦⟧() be the “meaning” function from respectively ‘future transition formulae’ × Σ2 to {tt,ff} and ‘past transition formulae’ × Σ2 to {tt,ff} and let σ be a finite interval (σ ∈ Σ2) with two states then

future transitions:

Tf⟦¬FT⟧(σ)
=
not Tf⟦FT⟧(σ)
Tf⟦FT1 ∨ FT2⟧(σ)
=
Tf⟦FT1⟧(σ) or Tf⟦FT2⟧(σ)
Tf⟦W⟧(σ)
=
P⟦W⟧(σ0)
Tf⟦ W⟧(σ)
=
P⟦W⟧(σ1)

past transitions:

Tp⟦¬PT⟧(σ)
=
not Tp⟦PT⟧(σ)
Tp⟦PT1 ∨ PT2⟧(σ)
=
Tp⟦PT1⟧(σ) or Tp⟦PT2⟧(σ)
Tp⟦W⟧(σ)
=
P⟦W⟧(σ1)
Tp⟦ W⟧(σ)
=
P⟦W⟧(σ0)

Semantics of Future Fusion expressions [Slide 11]

Let E⟦⟧() be the “meaning” function from ‘future fusion expressions’ × Σ+ to {tt,ff} and let σ be a finite interval (σ ∈ Σ+) then

E⟦test(W)⟧(σ)
=
P⟦W⟧(σ0) and |σ| = 0
E⟦step(FT)⟧(σ)
=
Tf⟦FT⟧(σ0…σ1) and |σ| = 1
E⟦FE1 ∨ FE2⟧(σ)
=
E⟦FE1⟧(σ) or E⟦FE2⟧(σ)
E⟦FE1 ; FE2⟧(σ) = tt
iff
exists a k, s.t. 0 ≤ k ≤|σ| and
E⟦FE1⟧(σ0…σk) = tt and
E⟦FE 2⟧(σk…σ|σ|) = tt
E⟦FE∗⟧(σ) = tt
iff
exist l0,…,ln s.t. l0 = 0 and ln = |σ| and
for all 0 ≤ j < n,lj < lj+1 and
E⟦FE⟧(σli…σlj+1) = tt

The semantics of ; and ∗ are the same as those of ITL

Semantics of Past Fusion expressions [Slide 12]

Let E⟦⟧() be the “meaning” function from ‘past fusion expressions’ × Σ+ to {tt,ff} and let σ be a finite interval (σ ∈ Σ+) then

E⟦test(W)⟧(σ)
=
P⟦W⟧(σ0) and |σ| = 0
E⟦pstep(PT)⟧(σ)
=
Tp⟦PT⟧(σ0…σ1) and |σ| = 1
E⟦PE1 ∨ PE2⟧(σ)
=
E⟦PE1⟧(σ) or E⟦PE2⟧(σ)
E⟦PE1 PE2⟧(σ) = tt
iff
exists a k, s.t. k ≤ i and
E⟦PE1⟧(σ0…σk) = tt and
E⟦PE2⟧(σk…σ|σ|) = tt
E⟦PE⟧(σ) = tt
iff
exist l0,…,ln s.t. l0 = 0 and ln = |σ| and
for all 0 ≤ j < n,lj < lj+1 and
E⟦PE⟧(σlj…σlj+1) = tt

The semantics of and are the same as ; and ∗

Semantics of Fusion logic [Slide 13]

Let M⟦⟧ be the “meaning” function from ‘fusion logic formulae’ × Σ+ ×IN to {tt,ff} and let σ be a finite interval and i a natural number then

M⟦true⟧(σ,i)
=
tt
M⟦p⟧(σ,i)
=
σi(p)
M⟦¬FL⟧(σ,i) =
=
not M⟦FL⟧(σ,i)
M⟦FL1 ∨ FL2⟧(σ,i)
=
M⟦FL1⟧(σ,i) or M⟦FL2⟧(σ,i)
M⟦ FL⟧(σ,i)
=
M⟦FL⟧(σ,i + 1) and i < |σ|
M⟦ FL⟧(σ,i)
=
M⟦FL⟧(σ,i − 1) and 0 < i

Semantics of Fusion logic [Slide 14]

M⟦⟨FE⟩FL⟧(σ,i) = tt
iff
exists a k, s.t. i ≤ k ≤|σ| and
E⟦FE⟧(σi…σk) = tt and
M⟦FL⟧(σ,k) = tt
M⟦FL⟨PE⟩⟧(σ,i) = tt
iff
exists a k, s.t. k ≤ i and
M⟦FL⟧(σ,k) = tt and
E⟦PE⟧(σk…σi) = tt
M⟦FL1 U FL2⟧(σ,i) = tt
iff
exists a k, s.t. i ≤ k ≤|σ| and
M⟦FL2⟧(σ,k) = tt and
for all i ≤ j < k,M⟦FL1⟧(σ,j) = tt
M⟦FL1 S FL2⟧(σ,i) = tt
iff
exists a k, s.t. k ≤ i and
M⟦FL2⟧(σ,k) = tt and
for all k < j ≤ i,M⟦FL1⟧(σ,j) = tt

non-strict U and S see [4]

Semantics of Fusion logic [Slide 15]

⟨FE⟩FL and FL⟨PE⟩ are similar to ; and of [1]:

M⟦⟨FE⟩FL⟧(σ,i) = tt
iff
exists a k, s.t. i ≤ k ≤|σ| and
E⟦FE⟧(σi…σk) = tt and
M⟦FL⟧(σ,k) = tt
M⟦FL⟨PE⟩⟧(σ,i) = tt
iff
exists a k, s.t. k ≤ i and
M⟦FL⟧(σ,k) = tt and
E⟦PE⟧(σk…σi) = tt

M⟦FL1 ; FL2⟧(σ,i) = tt
iff
exists a k, s.t. i ≤ k ≤|σ| and
M⟦FL1⟧(σ0…σk,i) = tt and
M⟦FL2⟧(σ,k) = tt
M⟦FL1 FL2⟧(σ,i) = tt
iff
exists a k, s.t. k ≤ i and
M⟦FL1⟧(σ,k) = tt and
M⟦FL2⟧(σk…σ|σ|,i − k) = tt

Difference of E⟦FE⟧(σi…σk) = tt is because FE is a future fusion expression and therefore can not refer to states before state σi

Difference of E⟦PE⟧(σk…σi) = tt is because PE is a past fusion expression and therefore can not refer to states after state σi

Derived operators [Slide 16]

Derived future Fusion expression operators

lener(0)
≜
test(true)
lener(n + 1)
≜
step(true) ; lener(n)
trueer
≜
step(true)∗
moreer
≜
step(true) ; trueer
erW
≜
trueer ; test(W) ; trueer

Derived past Fusion expression operators

lenel(0)
≜
test(true)
lenel(n + 1)
≜
lenel(n) pstep(true)
trueel
≜
pstep(true)
moreel
≜
trueel pstep(true)
elW
≜
trueel test(W) trueel

Derived operators [Slide 17]

Derived Boolean operators

FL1 ∧ FL2
≜
¬(¬FL1 ∨¬FL2)
FL1 ⊃ FL2
≜
¬FL1 ∨ FL2
FL1 ≡ FL2
≜
(FL1 ⊃ FL2) ∧ (FL2 ⊃ FL1)

Derived future Fusion logic operators

morer
≜
true
emptyr
≜
¬morer
lenr(0)
≜
emptyr
lenr(n + 1)
≜
⟨step(true)⟩lenr(n)
FL
≜
true U FL
FL
≜
¬(¬FL)
[FE]FL
≜
¬(⟨FE⟩¬FL)

Derived operators [Slide 18]

Derived past Fusion logic operators

morel
≜
true
emptyl
≜
¬morel
first
≜
emptyl
lenl(0)
≜
emptyl
lenl(n + 1)
≜
lenl(n)⟨pstep(true)⟩
FL
≜
true S FL
FL
≜
¬(¬FL)
FL[PE]
≜
¬(¬FL⟨PE⟩)
FL
≜
FL
FL
≜
FL

Satisfiable and valid [Slide 19]

2025-12-19
Contact | Home | ITL home | Course | Proofs | Algebra | FL
© 1996-2025