Graduate Does this computation satisfy LTL formulas?

  • Thread starter Thread starter alma359
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around two LTL formulas: (p U q) U r and p U (q U r). It is established that the computation {r}ᵂ satisfies both formulas, while {p}{q}{p}{q}{r}ᵂ satisfies only the first, and {p}{r}ᵂ satisfies only the second. The user expresses confusion over AI tool results, particularly regarding the computation {p}{q}{r}ᵂ, which they believe only satisfies the first formula due to the timing of p's satisfaction. The forum emphasizes that AI references are not permitted in technical discussions.
alma359
Messages
2
Reaction score
1
I have two LTL formulas.

The first one is (p U q) U r
The second one is p U (q U r)

I know the computation {r}ᵂ satisfies both formulas, computation {p}{q}{p}{q}{r}ᵂ satisfies only the first formula, computation {p}{r}ᵂ satisfies only the second one and computations {p}ᵂ or ∅ᵂ don't satisfy any of them.

Currently I'm learning LTL and I tried using AI tools to find more computations that satisfy the formulas, but I got confused because of mixed results. For example the computation {p}{q}{r}ᵂ. According to AI tools it satisfies both formulas but I believe it only satisfies the first formula, and does not satisfy the second formula, because p is not satisfied at all times before r (p is satisfied at t = 0 but not at t = 1).

If someone could confirm if I am right or wrong it would be very helpful.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF!. What is LTL? This seems to deal with Sentence Logic.
 
Linear temporal logic
 
alma359 said:
Currently I'm learning LTL and I tried using AI tools to find more computations that satisfy the formulas, but I got confused because of mixed results. For example the computation {p}{q}{r}ᵂ. According to AI tools it satisfies both formulas but I believe it only satisfies the first formula, and does not satisfy the second formula, because p is not satisfied at all times before r (p is satisfied at t = 0 but not at t = 1).
Please keep in mind that we do not allow AI as a reference in the technical forums here. That is expressly against the PF rules at this time.
 
Greetings, I am studying probability theory [non-measure theory] from a textbook. I stumbled to the topic stating that Cauchy Distribution has no moments. It was not proved, and I tried working it via direct calculation of the improper integral of E[X^n] for the case n=1. Anyhow, I wanted to generalize this without success. I stumbled upon this thread here: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/how-to-prove-the-cauchy-distribution-has-no-moments.992416/ I really enjoyed the proof...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K