We study the relationship between least and inflationary fixed-point logic. In 1986, Gurevich and Shelah proved that in the restriction to finite structures, the two logics have the same expressive power. On infinite structures however, the question whether there is a formula in IFP not equivalent to any LFP-formula was left open.In this paper, we answer the question negatively, i.e. we show that the two logics are equally expressive on arbitrary structures. We give a syntactic translation of IFP-formulae to LFP-formulae (...) such that the two formulae are equivalent on all structures.As a consequence of the proof we establish a close correspondence between the LFP-alternation hierarchy and the IFP-nesting depth hierarchy. We also show that the alternation hierarchy for IFP collapses to the first level, i.e. the complement of any inflationary fixed point is itself an inflationary fixed point. (shrink)

The purpose of this article is to clarify the role that many-valued logic can or should play in formal specification of software systems for modeling partiality. We analyse a representative set of specification languages. Our findings suggest that many-valued logic is less useful for modeling those aspects of partiality, for which it is traditionally intended: modeling non-termination and error values. On the other hand, many-valued logic is emerging as a mainstream tool in abstraction of formal analyses of various kinds, and (...) we suggest that specification languages feature many-valued abstraction logics. (shrink)

We investigate expressiveness and definability issues with respect to minimal models, particularly in the scope of Circumscription. First, we give a proof of the failure of the Löwenheim-Skolem Theorem for Circumscription. Then we show that, if the class of P; Z-minimal models of a first-order sentence is Δ-elementary, then it is elementary. That is, whenever the circumscription of a first-order sentence is equivalent to a first-order theory, then it is equivalent to a finitely axiomatizable one. This means that classes of (...) models of circumscribed theories are either elementary or not Δ-elementary. Finally, using the previous result, we prove that, whenever a relation Pi is defined in the class of P; Z-minimal models of a first-order sentence Φ and whenever such class of P; Z-minimal models is Δ-elementary, then there is an explicit definition ψ for Pi such that the class of P; Z-minimal models of Φ is the class of models of Φ ∧ ψ. In order words, the circumscription of P in Φ with Z varied can be replaced by Φ plus this explicit definition ψ for Pi. (shrink)