皆様， (複数のメーリングリストに送信しています．重複して受信された場合はご容赦願います)
電気通信大学の中野と申します．
来る5月26日(金)，ブレーメン大学のSebastian Maneth先生がご講演を行います． 木トランスデューサ理論とその応用についてお話ししていただきますので， お時間のある方は是非ご参加ください．
日時： 2017年5月26日(金) 15:00-17:00 場所： 電気通信大学西9号館3階AVホール http://www.uec.ac.jp/about/profile/access/pdf/map.pdf (こちらの地図の68番の建物です．地図にはありませんが68番の南側に 門が設置されましたので，そちらをご利用されると便利です)
講演者：Prof. Sebastian Maneth (University of Bremen)
タイトル：View-Query Determinacy for Tree Transducers
概要： This talk consists of two parts each with a duration of approximately 40 minutes.
The first part focuses on the view-query determinacy problem. Given transformations v and q, the problem asks whether there exists a function f such that f(v(s))=q(s) for all possible inputs s. View-query determinacy is a strong static analysis with many important applications; for instance, it was used by Buneman, Davidson and Frey for data citation [CACM 59 (2016)]. For tree transducers, Hashimoto, Sawada, Ishihara, Seki, and Fujiwara showed in 2013 that determinacy is decidable for views realized by extended linear bottom-up tree transducers, and queries realized by single-valued bottom-up tree transducers. Their solution tests functionality of the inverse of the view composed with the query. We extend this result using known results about transducers and properties of uniformizers. A uniformizer of a relation R is a function that has the same domain as R. A query q is determined by a view v if and only if the composition v ; u ; q is equivalent to q, where u is a uniformizer of the inverse of v. Thus, our technique reduces the determinacy problem to the existence of uniformizers and to the decidability of equivalence. Henceforth, recent new results on decidability of equivalence immediately give rise to new results about determinacy.
These results about transducer determinacy only work for views given by linear (extended) transducers. It is easy to see that even if a view transducer copies once, at the input root node, then determinacy becomes undecidable. This is unfortunate, because some very basic translations cannot be realized by linear transducers but require copying. Consider for instance a view that regroups a list of publications into sublists of books, articles, etc. A tree transducer realizing this view needs copying (i.e., it needs to process the original list multiple times). The issue that we cannot deal with non-linear views lead us to study transducers with origin (Part 2 of the talk). Under origin semantics, transducers that produce their output in "different ways" are considered different, even if they realize the same tree translation. Under this more rigid semantics, determinacy can be decided even for non-linear views. In particular, origin determinacy is decidable if the view and query are either both given by deterministic top-down tree transducers with look-ahead, or, if they are both given by deterministic MSO definable transducers. Intuitively, the world becomes safer with origin, but more restrictive (e.g., the query “is book X before article Y in the original list?” becomes determined under origin semantics).
-- 中野 圭介 [email protected] 電気通信大学 大学院情報理工学研究科 http://millsmess.cs.uec.ac.jp/~ksk/