, Tree automata, mu-calculus and determinacy, in Proc. 32nd IEEE Symp. on Foundations of Computer Science, 1991, pp. 368-377. Home/Search Document Not in Database Summary Related Articles Check |
This paper is cited in the following contexts:
Why Are Modal Logics So Robustly Decidable? - Grädel (Correct)
....results and certainly no practical decision procedures. Q: So how can you do better 7 A: The proof of Rabin s Theorem is based on tree automata. By using automata directly for the calculus, we indeed get good algorithms, both for model checking problems and for satis ability problems [2, 14]. Q: So does the tree model property answer the question why modal logics are robustly decidable A: It is a partial answer, yes [31] But we would like to generalize it. We would like to have more powerful logics than ML, CTL and even the calculus that retain the nice properties of modal ....
, Tree automata, mu-calculus and determinacy, in Proc. 32nd IEEE Symp. on Foundations of Computer Science, 1991, pp. 368-377.
Why Are Modal Logics So Robustly Decidable? - Grädel (1999) (Correct)
....results and certainly no practical decision procedures. Q: So how can you do better A: The proof of Rabin s Theorem is based on tree automata. By using automata directly for the calculus, we indeed get good algorithms, both for model checking problems and for satisfiability problems [2, 14]. Q: So does the tree model property answer the question why modal logics are robustly decidable A: It is a partial answer, yes [30] But we would like to generalize it. We would like to have more powerful logics than ML, CTL and even the calculus that retain the nice properties of modal ....
, Tree automata, mu-calculus and determinacy, in Proc. 32nd IEEE Symp. on Foundations of Computer Science, 1991, pp. 368--377.
Online articles have much greater impact More about CiteSeer.IST Add search form to your site Submit documents Feedback
CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC