Talk:Finite model theory
Appearance
![]() | Mathematics Start‑class Mid‑priority | |||||||||
|
Perhaps we could mention that finite model theory might help us resolve P vs. NP? (See http://www2.ing.puc.cl/~jabaier/iic2212/poll-1.pdf for instance). My understanding is that several finite model theorists are in that field in hopes of conquering this major problem. Any thoughts?
Outline
- Character 1: Finite structure. Belongs to MT. relationship between a formal language and its interpretations. ...
- History:
- Trakhtenbrot 1950: failure of completeness theorem in FO,
- Scholz 1952: characterisation of specra in FO,
- Fagin 1974: the set of all properties expressible in existential second-order logic is precisely the complexity class NP,
- Chandra, Harel 1979/ 80: fixed-point FO extension for db query languages capable of expressing transitive closure.
- Immerman, Vardi 1982: fixed point logic over ordered structures captures PTIME -> descriptive complexity (... Immerman–Szelepcsényi theorem)
- Reference: Ebbinghaus, Flum 1995: Finite Model Theory
- Reference: Immermann 1999: Descriptive Complexity
- Reference: Abiteboul, Hull, Vianu 1995: Foundations of Databases —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.164.209.120 (talk) 23:56, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
- Character 2: Discrimination of structures
- Parts: FMT vs MT, Language/ Complexity classification
- Applications: databases, descriptive complexity, languages/ modeling
- Tools: games, locality, 0-1 laws
- Objects of study: FO, extensions of FO/ restrictions of SO, sub-FO