The Lattice of All Clones Definable by Binary Relations on a Three-Element Set

Similar documents
Chapter 1 : The language of mathematics.

Part II. Logic and Set Theory. Year

Counting quantifiers, subset surjective functions, and counting CSPs

Clones (3&4) Martin Goldstern. TACL Olomouc, June Discrete Mathematics and Geometry, TU Wien

First Order Logic (FOL)

Bernhard Nebel, Julien Hué, and Stefan Wölfl. June 27 & July 2/4, 2012

More Model Theory Notes

Clones containing all almost unary functions

Part II Logic and Set Theory

A strongly rigid binary relation

1. Group Theory Permutations.

Galois correspondence for counting quantifiers

ECEN 5682 Theory and Practice of Error Control Codes

MATH 3300 Test 1. Name: Student Id:

There is 2 c automorphisms of complex numbers

ON ENDOMORPHISM MONOIDS OF PARTIAL ORDERS AND CENTRAL RELATIONS 1

2.2 Lowenheim-Skolem-Tarski theorems

CLASSIFYING THE COMPLEXITY OF CONSTRAINTS USING FINITE ALGEBRAS

Combinations of Theories for Decidable Fragments of First-order Logic

Automorphisms and strongly invariant relations

Lecture Notes 1 Basic Concepts of Mathematics MATH 352

Galois Theory, summary

Set Theory and the Foundation of Mathematics. June 19, 2018

A Proof of CSP Dichotomy Conjecture

Section V.3. Splitting Fields, Algebraic Closure, and Normality (Supplement)

Automated Program Verification and Testing 15414/15614 Fall 2016 Lecture 7: Procedures for First-Order Theories, Part 1

Simple homogeneous structures

Department of Computer Science University at Albany, State University of New York Solutions to Sample Discrete Mathematics Examination II (Fall 2007)

Isomorphisms between pattern classes

The complexity of constraint satisfaction: an algebraic approach

Skeleton relational structures By J.A.J. van Leunen

Algebraic Cryptography Exam 2 Review

Introduction to Model Theory

arxiv: v1 [cs.pl] 19 May 2016

Combined Satisfiability Modulo Parametric Theories

Satisfiability Modulo Theories (SMT)

Equivalence of Propositions

First-Order Logic First-Order Theories. Roopsha Samanta. Partly based on slides by Aaron Bradley and Isil Dillig

First-Order Theorem Proving and Vampire. Laura Kovács (Chalmers University of Technology) Andrei Voronkov (The University of Manchester)

DO FIVE OUT OF SIX ON EACH SET PROBLEM SET

Page Points Possible Points. Total 200

An Introduction to Z3

Fields and Galois Theory. Below are some results dealing with fields, up to and including the fundamental theorem of Galois theory.

A monoidal interval of clones of selfdual functions

Notes for Math 290 using Introduction to Mathematical Proofs by Charles E. Roberts, Jr.

TESTING FOR A SEMILATTICE TERM

03 Review of First-Order Logic

Group construction in geometric C-minimal non-trivial structures.

Winter School on Galois Theory Luxembourg, February INTRODUCTION TO PROFINITE GROUPS Luis Ribes Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada

ClC (X ) : X ω X } C. (11)

First-Order Theorem Proving and Vampire

Weak bases of Boolean co-clones

Complexity of conservative Constraint Satisfaction Problems

Quantifiers. Leonardo de Moura Microsoft Research

Discrete Mathematics. W. Ethan Duckworth. Fall 2017, Loyola University Maryland

Algebraic Tractability Criteria for Infinite-Domain Constraint Satisfaction Problems

First-Order Logic. 1 Syntax. Domain of Discourse. FO Vocabulary. Terms

tp(c/a) tp(c/ab) T h(m M ) is assumed in the background.

On minimal models of the Region Connection Calculus

CSE507. Satisfiability Modulo Theories. Computer-Aided Reasoning for Software. Emina Torlak

SMT BASICS WS 2017/2018 ( ) LOGIC SATISFIABILITY MODULO THEORIES. Institute for Formal Models and Verification Johannes Kepler Universität Linz

The complexity of recursive constraint satisfaction problems.

Foundations of Mathematics

A Readable Introduction to Real Mathematics

Stipulations, multivalued logic, and De Morgan algebras

ACLT: Algebra, Categories, Logic in Topology - Grothendieck's generalized topological spaces (toposes)

a > 3, (a = b a = b + 1), f(a) = 0, f(b) = 1

S15 MA 274: Exam 3 Study Questions

International Workshop on Mathematics of Constraint Satisfaction: Algebra, Logic and Graph Theory

Let us first solve the midterm problem 4 before we bring up the related issues.

Exercises for Unit VI (Infinite constructions in set theory)

Disjoint n-amalgamation

Functions and cardinality (solutions) sections A and F TA: Clive Newstead 6 th May 2014

Combining Decision Procedures

Generalizing Gödel s Constructible Universe:

Extension fields II. Sergei Silvestrov. Spring term 2011, Lecture 13

Automated Program Verification and Testing 15414/15614 Fall 2016 Lecture 8: Procedures for First-Order Theories, Part 2

BASICS OF CLONE THEORY DRAFT. Contents

TOPOLOGY IS IRRELEVANT (IN THE INFINITE DOMAIN DICHOTOMY CONJECTURE FOR CONSTRAINT SATISFACTION PROBLEMS)

Equational Logic. Chapter Syntax Terms and Term Algebras

First Order Logic (FOL) 1 znj/dm2017

Lattices, closure operators, and Galois connections.

Logical Abstract Domains and Interpretations

LINDSTRÖM S THEOREM SALMAN SIDDIQI

Endomorphism rings generated using small numbers of elements arxiv:math/ v2 [math.ra] 10 Jun 2006

Math 429/581 (Advanced) Group Theory. Summary of Definitions, Examples, and Theorems by Stefan Gille

The Galois group of a polynomial f(x) K[x] is the Galois group of E over K where E is a splitting field for f(x) over K.

A GUIDE FOR MORTALS TO TAME CONGRUENCE THEORY

March 3, The large and small in model theory: What are the amalgamation spectra of. infinitary classes? John T. Baldwin

Chapter 1. Sets and Mappings

Copyright c 2007 Jason Underdown Some rights reserved. statement. sentential connectives. negation. conjunction. disjunction

Foundations Revision Notes

WHAT IS AN SMT SOLVER? Jaeheon Yi - April 17, 2008

G52DOA - Derivation of Algorithms Predicate Logic

Outline. We will now investigate the structure of this important set.

MODEL THEORY FOR ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY

Between proof theory and model theory Three traditions in logic: Syntactic (formal deduction)

Unsolvable problems, the Continuum Hypothesis, and the nature of infinity

Jónsson posets and unary Jónsson algebras

Mathematical Preliminaries. Sipser pages 1-28

Transcription:

1 The Lattice of All Clones Definable by Binary Relations on a Three-Element Set Stanislav V. Moiseev <stanislav.moiseev@gmail.com> The 94th Workshop on General Algebra (AAA94) Novi Sad, Serbia, June 15 18, 2017

2 What is Studied: Relational Clones Let R k be the set of all finitary predicates on {0, 1,..., k 1}. Definition. M R k is called a relational clone if 1. {false (0), true (0), eq (2) } M; 2. and M is closed under primitive positive formulas: p (r1) 1 M,..., p (rn) n M, ( ) p (r) (x 1,..., x r ) = y 1... y s p (r1) 1 (z 1,1,..., z 1,r1 )... p (rn) n (z n,1,..., z n,rn ) = p (r) M (s 0, n 0; z k,j is one of the symbols: x 1,..., x r, y 1,..., y s ).

3 What is Studied: Closure Operator for Predicates Definition. We say that p is generated from M if p {false (0), true (0), eq (2) } or if p can be expressed as a primitive positive formula: p (r) (x 1,..., x r ) = ( ) = y 1... y s p (r1) 1 (z 1,1,..., z 1,r1 )... p (rn) n (z n,1,..., z n,rn ) The set of all predicates generated from M we denote as [M] p.p.

4 What is Studied: Finitely Generated Relational Clones Definition. A relational clone M is finitely generated if M 0 M: (M 0 is finite) (M = [M 0 ] p.p. ). Definition. Degree of a (finitely generated) relational clone M is the smallest number r such that M = [M R k (r)] p.p. where R k (r) is the set of all predicates of arity r on {0, 1,..., k 1}.

What is Studied: Finitely Generated Relational Clones Number of relational clones of degree r on k-element set. r = 2 r = 3 r = 4 k = 2 19 44 54 k = 3? > 2 50 > 2 500 k = 4 > 2 60 > 2 220 > 2 270 1 Figures for k = 2 are known from Блохина Г. Н. О предикатном описании классов Поста. Дискретный анализ 16, 16 29 (1970). 2 Figures in red are known from Dmitriy Zhuk, Stanislav Moiseev. On the Clones Containing a Near-Unanimity Function. 5 ISMVL 2013: 129-134.

6 Our Aim Construct all relational clones of degree 2 on three-element set: { M M = [M R 3 (2)] p.p. } =?

7 Our Tools and Obstacles Main tool Generation of predicates. Main obstacle There are infinitely many primitive positive formulas p(x 1,..., x r ) = y 1... y s φ(...) No limit for arities of predicates. No limit for the number of existential quantifiers. Our solution Consider binary predicates only. Limit the complexity of formulas.

8 Solution: Weak Closure Operator Definition Let M R k (2). By [M] weak we denote the smallest set satisfying the axioms: 1. {false (2), true (2), eq (2) } [M] weak. 2. If p M then p [M] weak. 3. [M] weak is closed under the following operations: op_permutation(p)(x 0, x 1 ) p(x 1, x 0 ) op_conjunction(p 1, p 2 )(x 0, x 1 ) p 1 (x 0, x 1 ) p 2 (x 0, x 1 ) op_composition(p 1, p 2 )(x 0, x 1 ) y (p 1 (x 0, y) p 2 (y, x 1 ) )

9 Our Plan to Compute All Relational Clones 1. Compute all [ ] weak -closed sets of binary predicates. 2. Analyze the connection between weakly closed sets of binary predicates and relational clones. [M 0 ] weak [M 0 ] p.p. [M 1 ] weak [M 2 ] weak [M 1 ] p.p. = [M 2 ] p.p. [M 3 ] weak weakly closed sets of binary predicates [M 3 ] p.p. relational clones

10 Step 1: Computation of All Weakly Closed Sets of Binary Predicates Algorithm Fix a sequence of all predicates: p 1, p 2,..., p 512. We will use an inductive procedure with 512 steps.

11 Algorithm: Induction Basis [ ] weak

Algorithm: Induction Step n Given: A set {M 0,..., M sn 1 } of all [ ] weak -closed predicate sets generated by predicates p 1, p 2,..., p n 1. Task: Construct all [ ] weak -closed predicate sets generated by p 1, p 2,..., p n 1, p n. M 0 M 1 M 2 M 3 12 M 4

Algorithm: Induction Step n M 0 +p n [M 0 {p n }] weak M 1 M 2 M 3 +p n [M 2 {p n }] weak = [M 3 {p n }] weak M 4 = [M 1 {p n }] weak = [M 4 {p n }] weak 13 new classes constructed on this induction step

14 Results Theorem On three-element set, there are exactly 2, 079, 040 weakly closed sets of binary predicates.

15 Our Plan to Compute All Relational Clones 1. Compute all [ ] weak -closed sets of predicates. 2. Analyze the connection between weakly closed sets of binary predicates and relational clones. [M 0 ] weak [M 0 ] p.p. [M 1 ] weak [M 2 ] weak [M 1 ] p.p. = [M 2 ] p.p. [M 3 ] weak weakly closed sets of binary predicates [M 3 ] p.p. relational clones

16 Step 2: Clone Separation Clone separation problem [M 1 ] weak preserves Given: [M 1 ] weak [M 2 ] weak Decide: [M 1 ] p.p.? = [M 2 ] p.p. f [M 2 ] weak preserves not

17 Step 2: Clone Separation Microsoft Z3 Solver Z3 is a Satisfiability Modulo Theories (SMT) solver. Z3 integrates several decision procedures. Z3 is used in several program analysis, verification, test case generation projects at Microsoft. https://github.com/z3prover/z3

18 Clone Separation: Specification for Z3 ;; define a finite domain (declare-datatypes () ((E3 V0 V1 V2))) ;; define a predicate p1 (declare-fun p1 (E3 E3) Bool) (assert (= (p1 V0 V0) true)) (assert (= (p1 V0 V1) true)) (assert (= (p1 V0 V2) true)) (assert (= (p1 V1 V0) false)) (assert (= (p1 V1 V1) true)) (assert (= (p1 V1 V2) true)) (assert (= (p1 V2 V0) false)) (assert (= (p1 V2 V1) false)) (assert (= (p1 V2 V2) true)) [M] weak preserves preserves not p (p / [M] weak ) f

19 Clone Separation: Specification for Z3 ;; declare f as an uninterpreted functional symbol (declare-fun f (E3 E3) E3) ;; f preserves p1 (assert (forall ((x0_0 E3) (x0_1 E3) (x1_0 E3) (x1_1 E3)) (implies (and (p1 x0_0 x0_1) (p1 x1_0 x1_1)) (and (p1 (f x0_0 x1_0) (f x0_1 x1_1)))))) ;; f does not preserve p (assert (not (forall ((x0_0 E3) (x0_1 E3) (x1_0 E3) (x1_1 E3)) (implies (and (p x0_0 x0_1) (p x1_0 x1_1)) (and (p (f x0_0 x1_0) (f x0_1 x1_1)))))))

Results Theorem (on clone separation) Given [M 1 ] weak [M 2 ] weak. There exists a function f (5) of arity 5 such that (f (5) preserves [M 1 ] weak ) (f (5) preserves [M 2 ] weak ). [M 1 ] weak preserves preserves not f (5) 20 [M 2 ] weak

Results Corollary Lattice of all weakly closed sets of binary predicates is isomorphic to the lattice of all relational clones of degree 2. [M 0 ] weak [M 0 ] p.p. [M 1 ] weak [M 2 ] weak [M 1 ] p.p. [M 2 ] p.p. 21 [M 3 ] weak weakly closed sets of binary predicates [M 3 ] p.p. relational clones

22 Results Theorem (on the closure operator in R 3 (2)) Let M R 3 (2) such that {false (2), true (2), eq (2) } M. Then [M] p.p. R 3 (2) = [M] weak.

23 Example p is expressed as a primitive positive formula over p 1, p 2, p 3, p 4, p 5 : p(x 1, x 2 ) = y 1 y 2 (p 1 (x 1, y 1 ) p 2 (x 2, y 1 ) p 3 (y 1, y 2 ) p 4 (y 2, x 1 ) p 5 (y 2, x 2 ) ). Fix p 1, p 2, p 3, p 4, p 5 R 3 (2). Then there exists a formula φ over op_permutation(p)(x 0, x 1 ) p(x 1, x 0 ) op_conjunction(p 1, p 2 )(x 0, x 1 ) p 1 (x 0, x 1 ) p 2 (x 0, x 1 ) op_composition(p 1, p 2 )(x 0, x 1 ) y (p 1 (x 0, y) p 2 (y, x 1 ) ) such that p(x 1, x 2 ) φ(false (2), true (2), eq (2), p 1, p 2, p 3, p 4, p 5 )(x 1, x 2 ). φ depends on p 1, p 2, p 3, p 4, p 5.

24 On Weak Closure for k 4 Observation (known from Dmitriy N. Zhuk, Reinhard Pöschel) Let k 4. There exists M R k (2) such that [M] p.p. R k (2) [M] weak.

25 On Weak Closure for k 4 0 0 2 2 3 1 3 1 4 4 5 (a) Predicate p R 6(2) 5 (b) Predicate q R 6(2)

26 On Weak Closure for k 4 M = {false (2), true (2), eq (2), p}. [M] weak = M. q(x 1, x 2 ) = y 1 y 2... y k 2 k 2 i=1 p(x 1, y i ) i, j: i j p(y i, y j ) k 2 j=1 p(y j, x 2 ). q [M] p.p. \ [M] weak.

27 Results

28 Results

29 Summary: Finitely Generated Relational Clones Number of relational clones of degree r on k-element set. r = 2 r = 3 r = 4 k = 2 19 44 54 k = 3 2, 079, 040 > 2 50 > 2 500 k = 4 > 2 60 > 2 220 > 2 270

30 Appendix

31 History: Clones of Degree 2 Bashtanov (1989) Classification of binary predicates in P 3 modulo automorphisms of P 3 and permutation of variables. All 74 equivalence classes were found. The number of corresponding clones of functions is 67.

32 History: Clones of Degree 2 Marchenkov S. S. (1997, 2003). A description of clones in P 3 containing the ternary discriminator function p(x, y, z) = z if x = y; x otherwise. 144 clones were described, 6 were missed.

History: Clones of Degree 2 33 Rosenberg (1993). A description of all 23 clones in P 3 containing f(x, y) = 2x + 2y.

34 History: Computer Calculations in Clone Theory Theorem [Wilde, Raney, 1972, without proof] Let Then (P 3 (1), ) has exactly (f g)(x) f(g(x)) 1299 subsemigroups (including ).

35 History: Computer Calculations in Clone Theory Theorem [Csákany, 1983, without proof] P 3 has exactly 84 minimal clones.

36 Thank You! {false (0), true (0), eq (2) } = 2, 079, 040 R 3

37 What is Studied? Let P k be the set of all finitary functions on {0, 1,..., k 1} (k < ℵ 0 ). Definition. F P k is called a clone if 1. F contains all the projection mappings: pr (r) j : (x 1,..., x r ) x j 2. and F is closed under superposition of functions: f (n) F, f (r1) 1 F,..., f (rn) n F, ( ) h (r) (x 1,..., x r ) = f (n) f (r) 1 (x 1,..., x r ),..., f (r) n (x 1,..., x r ) = h (r) F.

38 What is Studied? The set of all clones of P k forms a lattice L(P k ) with respect to inclusion. The lattice L(P k ) is the main object of study in clone theory. 1. L(P 1 ) contains exactly one element. 2. L(P 2 ) is countable. 3. L(P k ) (k 3) has the cardinality of the continuum.

39 Main Tools: Idea of a Function Preserving a Relation Let R k be the set of all finitary predicates on {0, 1,..., k 1}. Definition. f (n) P k preserves p (r) R k if a 1 p (r),..., a n p (r) = f (n) (a 1,..., a n ) p (r). a 1 1 a 1 2 a 1 n a 2 1 a 2 2 a 2 n f (n) b 1 f (n) b 2 a r 1 a r 2 a r n (r) p p (r) p (r) f (n) b r p (r)

40 Main Tools: Idea of a Function Preserving a Relation Rosenberg (1970) Description of all maximal clones in P k based on the idea of a function preserving a relation. Theorem [Rosenberg] Every maximal clone in P k has the form where ρ R (r) k Pol ρ {f P k f preserves ρ} (1 r k).

41 Main Tools: The Galois Connection Between Clones and Relational Clones Krasner (1939, 1945, 1968/69) The connection between algebras and relations was introduced. A special Galois connection between subsets of the permutation groups S n {f P k (1) f is bijective} and subsets of R k was formulated.

42 Main Tools: The Galois Connection Between Clones and Relational Clones Geiger (1968); Bodnarchuk et al. (1969) Galois theory for function algebras and relation algebra. Theorem [Geiger; Bodnarchuk et al.] There exists a one-to-one correspondence between clones and relational clones. If F P k is a clone, then Pol Inv F = F. If M R k is a relational clone, then Inv Pol M = M.

43 Main Tools: The Galois Connection Between Clones and Relational Clones Inv: F {p R k f F : f preserves p} F 3 M 0 lattice of clones of functions F 2 F 1 F 0 M 1 M 2 lattice of relational M 3 clones Pol: M {f P k p M : f preserves p}

44 Solution: Weak Closure Operator Remark (on consistency of weak closure operator) Weak closure [ ] weak is consistent with the closure under all primitive positive formulas: [[M] weak ] p.p.f = [M] p.p.. M [ ] p.p. [ ] weak [ ] p.p. [[M] weak ] p.p. = [M] p.p. [M] weak

45 Appendix Some properties of the lattice of all relational clones of degree 2. Total number of classes 2, 079, 040 Number of maximal subclasses 18 The longest chain size 55 Number of maximal subclones of a given clone 0 30 (average 5.8)