<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<OAI-PMH xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/OAI-PMH.xsd">
  <responseDate>2026-07-21T20:02:54Z</responseDate>
  <request identifier="23539" metadataPrefix="oai_dc" verb="GetRecord">https://drops.dagstuhl.de/oai</request>
  <GetRecord>
    <record>
      <header>
        <identifier>oai:drops-oai.dagstuhl.de:23539</identifier>
        <datestamp>2025-10-02T12:58:11Z</datestamp>
        <setSpec>ddc:004</setSpec>
        <setSpec>open_access</setSpec>
      </header>
      <metadata>
        <oai_dc:dc xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
          <dc:title>Positive and Monotone Fragments of FO and LTL</dc:title>
          <dc:creator>Iosti, Simon</dc:creator>
          <dc:creator>Kuperberg, Denis</dc:creator>
          <dc:creator>Moreau, Quentin</dc:creator>
          <dc:subject>Positive logic</dc:subject>
          <dc:subject>LTL</dc:subject>
          <dc:subject>separation</dc:subject>
          <dc:subject>first-order</dc:subject>
          <dc:subject>monotone</dc:subject>
          <dc:description>We study the positive logic FO^+ on finite words, and its fragments, pursuing and refining the work initiated in [Denis Kuperberg, 2023]. First, we transpose notorious logic equivalences into positive first-order logic: FO^+ is equivalent to LTL^+, and its two-variable fragment FO^{2+} with (resp. without) successor available is equivalent to UTL^+ with (resp. without) the "next" operator X available. This shows that despite previous negative results, the class of FO^+-definable languages exhibits some form of robustness. We then exhibit an example of an FO-definable monotone language on one predicate, that is not FO^+-definable, refining the example from [Denis Kuperberg, 2023] with 3 predicates. Moreover, we show that such a counter-example cannot be FO²-definable. Finally, we provide a new example distinguishing the positive and monotone versions of FO² without quantifier alternation. This does not rely on a variant of the previously known counter-example, and witnesses a new phenomenon.</dc:description>
          <dc:publisher>Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik</dc:publisher>
          <dc:contributor>Simon Iosti and Denis Kuperberg and Quentin Moreau</dc:contributor>
          <dc:date>2025</dc:date>
          <dc:relation>Is Part Of LIPIcs, Volume 334, 52nd International Colloquium on Automata, Languages, and Programming (ICALP 2025)</dc:relation>
          <dc:type>InProceedings</dc:type>
          <dc:type>Text</dc:type>
          <dc:type>doc-type:ResearchArticle</dc:type>
          <dc:type>publishedVersion</dc:type>
          <dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
          <dc:identifier>doi:10.4230/LIPIcs.ICALP.2025.162</dc:identifier>
          <dc:identifier>urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-235398</dc:identifier>
          <dc:identifier>https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.ICALP.2025.162</dc:identifier>
          <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
          <dc:rights>https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode</dc:rights>
        </oai_dc:dc>
      </metadata>
    </record>
  </GetRecord>
</OAI-PMH>
