Roman Kontchakov
Skip Abstract Section
Abstract
We consider the quantifier-free languages, Bc and Bc°, obtained by augmenting the signature of Boolean algebras with a unary predicate representing, respectively, the property of being connected, and the property of having a connected interior. These languages are interpreted over the regular closed sets of Rn (n ≥ 2) and, additionally, over the regular closed semilinear sets of Rn. The resulting logics are examples of formalisms that have recently been proposed in the Artificial Intelligence literature under the rubric Qualitative Spatial Reasoning. We prove that the satisfiability problem for Bc is undecidable over the regular closed semilinear sets in all dimensions greater than 1, and that the satisfiability problem for Bc and Bc° is undecidable over both the regular closed sets and the regular closed semilinear sets in the Euclidean plane. However, we also prove that the satisfiability problem for Bc° is NP-complete over the regular closed sets in all dimensions greater than 2, while the corresponding problem for the regular closed semilinear sets is ExpTime-complete. Our results show, in particular, that spatial reasoning is much harder over Euclidean spaces than over arbitrary topological spaces.
- Areces, C., Blackburn, P., and Marx, M. 2000. The computational complexity of hybrid temporal logics. Logic J. IGPL 8, 653--679.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Balbiani, P., Tinchev, T., and Vakarelov, D. 2007. Modal logics for region-based theories of space. Fundamenta Informaticae 81, 29--82. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Bennett, B. 1994. Spatial reasoning with propositional logic. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning. Morgan Kaufmann, 51--62.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Biacino, L. and Gerla, G. 1991. Connection structures. Notre Dame J. Formal Logic 32, 242--247.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Bochnak, J., Coste, M., and Roy, M.-F. 1998. Real Algebraic Geometry. Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete, vol. 36, Springer.Google Scholar
- Bourbaki, N. 1966. General Topology, Part 1. Hermann, Paris, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.Google Scholar
- Clarke, B. L. 1981. A calculus of individuals based on connection. Notre Dame J. Formal Logic 23, 204--218.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Clarke, B. L. 1985. Individuals and points. Notre Dame J. Formal Logic 26, 61--75.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Cohn, A. and Renz, J. 2008. Qualitative spatial representation and reasoning. In Handbook of Knowledge Representation, F. van Hermelen, V. Lifschitz, and B. Porter Eds., Elsevier, 551--596.Google Scholar
- Cohn, A., Bennett, B., Gooday, J., and Gotts, N. 1997. Qualitative spatial representation and reasoning with the region connection calculus. Geoinformatica 1, 3, 275--316. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Davis, E. 2006. The expressivity of quantifying over regions. J. Logic Computation 16, 891--916.Google ScholarCross Ref
- de Laguna, T. 1922. Point, line and surface as sets of solids. J. Philosophy 19, 449--6.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Dimov, G. and Vakarelov, D. 2006a. Contact algebras and region-based theory of space: A proximity approach, I. Fundamenta Informaticae 74, 2--3, 209--249. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Dimov, G. and Vakarelov, D. 2006b. Contact algebras and region-based theory of space: A proximity approach, II. Fundamenta Informaticae 74, 2--3, 251--282. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Dornheim, C. 1998. Undecidability of plane polygonal mereotopology. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning. Morgan Kaufmann, 342--353.Google Scholar
- Düntsch, I. and Winter, M. 2005. A representation theorem for Boolean contact algebras. Theor. Comput. Sci. 347, 498--512. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Egenhofer, M. and Franzosa, R. 1991. Point-set topological spatial relations. Int. J. Geograph. Info. Syst. 5, 161--174.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Gabelaia, D., Kontchakov, R., Kurucz, A., Wolter, F., and Zakharyaschev, M. 2005. Combining spatial and temporal logics: Expressiveness vs. complexity. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 23, 167--243. Google ScholarCross Ref
- Gödel, K. 1933. Eine Interpretation des intuitionistischen Aussagenkalküls. Ergebnisse eines mathema- tischen Kolloquiums 4, 39--40.Google Scholar
- Goranko, V. and Passy, S. 1992. Using the universal modality: Gains and questions. J. Logic Comput. 2, 5--30.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Griffiths, A. 2008. Computational properties of spatial logics in the real plane. Ph.D. thesis, School of Computer Science, University of Manchester.Google Scholar
- Grzegorczyk, A. 1951. Undecidability of some topological theories. Fundamenta Mathematicae 38, 137--152.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Hilbert, D. 1909. Grundlagen der Geometrie. B.G. Teubner, Leipzig and Berlin.Google Scholar
- Kontchakov, R., Pratt-Hartmann, I., Wolter, F., and Zakharyaschev, M. 2008a. On the computational complexity of spatial logics with connectedness constraints. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Logic Programming, Artificial Intelligence and Reasoning. Lecture Notes on Artificial Intelligence, vol. 5330. Springer, 574--589. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kontchakov, R., Pratt-Hartmann, I., Wolter, F., and Zakharyaschev, M. 2008b. Topology, connectedness, and modal logic. In Advances in Modal Logic, vol. 7, College Publications, London, 151--176.Google Scholar
- Kontchakov, R., Pratt-Hartmann, I., Wolter, F., and Zakharyaschev, M. 2010a. Spatial logics with connectedness predicates. Logical Methods Comput. Sci. 6, 3:7, 1--43.Google Scholar
- Kontchakov, R., Pratt-Hartmann, I., and Zakharyaschev, M. 2010b. Interpreting topological logics over Euclidean spaces. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning. AAAI Press, 534--544.Google Scholar
- Kontchakov, R., Nenov, Y., Pratt-Hartmann, I., and Zakharyaschev, M. 2011. On the decidability of connectedness constraints in 2D and 3D Euclidean spaces. In Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. AAAI Press, 957--962. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Koppelberg, S. 1989. Handbook of Boolean Algebras. Vol. 1, North-Holland.Google Scholar
- Kripke, S. 1963. Semantical analysis of modal logic I: Normal modal propositional calculi. Zeitschrift für Mathematische Logik und Grundlagen der Mathematik 9, 67--96.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Kuratowski, C. 1928. Sur la structure des frontières communes á deux régions. Fundamenta Mathematicae 12, 20--42.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Lutz, C. and Wolter, F. 2006. Modal logics of topological relations. Logical Methods Comput. Sci. 2, 2:5, 1--41.Google Scholar
- McKinsey, J. and Tarski, A. 1944. The algebra of topology. Ann. Math. 45, 141--191.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Nebel, B. 1995. Computational properties of qualitative spatial reasoning: First results. In Proceedings of the Annual German Conference on Artificial Intelligence. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 981, Springer, 233--244. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Newman, M. 1964. Elements of the Topology of Plane Sets of Points. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Nutt, W. 1999. On the translation of qualitative spatial reasoning problems into modal logics. In Proceedings of the Annual German Conference on Artificial Intelligence. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1701, Springer, 113--124. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Orlov, I. 1928. The calculus of compatibility of propositions. Mathematics of the USSR, Sbornik 35, 263--286. (In Russian).Google Scholar
- Post, E. 1946. A variant of a recursively unsolvable problem. Bull. AMS 52, 264--268.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Pratt, I. and Lemon, O. 1997. Ontologies for plane, polygonal mereotopology. Notre Dame J. Formal Logic 38, 2, 225--245.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Pratt-Hartmann, I. 2002. A topological constraint language with component counting. J. Applied Non-Classical Logics 12, 441--467.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Pratt-Hartmann, I. 2007. First-order mereotopology. In Handbook of Spatial Logics, M. Aiello, I. Pratt-Hartmann, and J. van Benthem Eds., Springer, 13--97.Google Scholar
- Randell, D., Cui, Z., and Cohn, A. 1992. A spatial logic based on regions and connection. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning. Morgan Kaufmann, 165--176.Google Scholar
- Renz, J. 1998. A canonical model of the region connection calculus. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning. Morgan Kaufmann, 330--341.Google Scholar
- Renz, J. and Nebel, B. 1997. On the complexity of qualitative spatial reasoning: A maximal tractable fragment of the region connection calculus. In Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. Morgan Kaufmann, 522--527.Google Scholar
- Renz, J. and Nebel, B. 1999. On the complexity of qualitative spatial reasoning. Artif. Intell. 108, 69--123. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Renz, J. and Nebel, B. 2001. Efficient methods for qualitative spatial reasoning. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 15, 289--318. Google ScholarCross Ref
- Schaefer, M., Sedgwick, E., and Štefankovič, D. 2003. Recognizing string graphs in NP. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 67, 365--380. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Shehtman, V. 1999. “Everywhere” and “Here”. J. Applied Non-Classical Logics 9, 369--379.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Smith, T. and Park, K. 1992. An algebraic approach to spatial reasoning. Int. J. Geograph. Info. Syst. 6, 177--192.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Tarski, A. 1959. What is elementary geometry? In The Axiomatic Method, with Special Reference to Geometry and Physics, L. Henkin and P. Suppes Eds., North-Holland, 16--29.Google Scholar
- Tinchev, T. and Vakarelov, D. 2010. Logics of space with connectedness predicates: Complete axiomatizations. In Advances in Modal Logic. Vol. 8, College Publications, London, 434--453.Google Scholar
- Vakarelov, D. 2007. Region-based theory of space: Algebras of regions, representation theory, and logics. In Mathematical Problems from Applied Logic II, D. Gabbay, S. Goncharov, and M. Zakharyaschev Eds., Springer, 267--348.Google Scholar
- van Benthem, J. and Bezhanishvili, G. 2007. Modal logics of space. In Handbook of Spatial Logics, M. Aiello, I. Pratt-Hartmann, and J. van Benthem Eds., Springer, 217--298.Google Scholar
- Whitehead, A. N. 1929. Process and Reality. Macmillan, New York.Google Scholar
- Wolter, F. and Zakharyaschev, M. 2000. Spatial reasoning in RCC-8 with Boolean region terms. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Artificial Intelligence. IOS Press, 244--248.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Topological Logics with Connectedness over Euclidean Spaces
Recommendations
Spatial reasoning with RCC 8 and connectedness constraints in Euclidean spaces
The language RCC 8 is a widely-studied formalism for describing topological arrangements of spatial regions. The variables of this language range over the collection of non-empty, regular closed sets of n-dimensional Euclidean space, here denoted RC + ( ...
Reasoning with lines in the Euclidean space
IJCAI'09: Proceedings of the 21st International Joint Conference on Artificial IntelligenceThe main result of this paper is to show that the problem of instantiating a finite and path-consistent constraint network of lines in the Euclidean space is NP-complete. Indeed, we already know that reasoning with lines in the Euclidean space is NP-...
The Automatic Baire Property and an Effective Property of -Rational Functions
Language and Automata Theory and ApplicationsAbstractWe prove that -regular languages accepted by Büchi or Muller automata satisfy an effective automata-theoretic version of the Baire property. Then we use this result to obtain a new effective property of rational functions over infinite words which ...
Comments