Search Results
| Search type | Search syntax |
|---|---|
| Tags | [tag] |
| Exact | "words here" |
| Author |
user:1234 user:me (yours) |
| Score |
score:3 (3+) score:0 (none) |
| Answers |
answers:3 (3+) answers:0 (none) isaccepted:yes hasaccepted:no inquestion:1234 |
| Views | views:250 |
| Code | code:"if (foo != bar)" |
| Sections |
title:apples body:"apples oranges" |
| URL | url:"*.example.com" |
| Saves | in:saves |
| Status |
closed:yes duplicate:no migrated:no wiki:no |
| Types |
is:question is:answer |
| Exclude |
-[tag] -apples |
| For more details on advanced search visit our help page | |
Results tagged with linear-temporal-logic
Search options answers only
not deleted
user 98
LTL (linear temporal logic or linear-time temporal logic) is a temporal logic that can encode assertions about the future of traces.
3
votes
Why is GFp -> GFq false in LTL, even though GFp and GFq are false?
Extending upon Klaus' answer, here are counter-examples:
$s_1^\omega = (p,\lnot q)^\omega$ is a trace -- so $\mathrm{G}\, \mathrm{F}\, q$ is not valid.
$s_1s_2^\omega = (p,\lnot q)(\lnot p,\lnot q)^ …
- 72.9k
2
votes
Howto formally go about proving that two LTL formulas are equivalent?
Hint: LTL (on infinite strings) is equivalent to Büchi automata.
- 72.9k
3
votes
Accepted
Time to construct a GNBA for LTL formula
In general, logical formulae can be thought of as trees; inner nodes are operators and leaves are atomic propositions. Therefore, every formula consists of as many direct subformulae (that is on the f …
- 72.9k